While it's not live (as in, not an established change in the game yet--pending a few minor decisions and code implementation), the new documentation for shadow artists in Tuluk is now available for perusal and discussion. It is titled "BETA" because these are not active documents (so you do not need to use them in-game yet).
Shadow Artists - BETA (http://armageddon.org/help/view/Shadow%20Artists)
Shadow Artist FAQ - BETA (http://armageddon.org/help/view/Shadow%20Artist%20FAQ)
Shadow Agent FAQ - BETA (http://armageddon.org/help/view/Shadow%20Agent%20FAQ)
A "what you know" section in the Tuluki RP or even in the FAQ would be nice.
Do commoners know about this? Is it something not discussed with foreigners? Or is this system only really known to Nobles and Templars who "recruit" talented individuals into this art.
EDIT:
Sorry to be so bold from the main page on Shadow Artists:
"The templarate acts as a broker, and will not reject a contract for any reasons other than the hiring party's lack of social status or their being unable to pay the established fee. "
I somehow see this rule being broken if its not in the interest of the Templar.
This would be covered in the Tuluki RP doc as well as very briefly in the "What You Know" doc as well. I didn't see any reason to change those temporarily though (since it's not live).
Commoners would know about this since they can both be agents as well as artists.
I am not sure why it would be forbidden to discuss it with foreigners, but I'm also not sure that any Tuluki would go out of their way to make sure every foreigner knows how this works.
How shadow artists are discussed in polite conversation might be a good inclusion. Are they viewed as public servants, tools used by the template to help up hold and maintain a "right" and "just" society. Would this be a thin veneer or would some commoners legitimately believe this? Maybe people think of them as necessary tools used to facilitate politics/business (and even personal vendettas).
Quote from: Molten Heart on September 26, 2013, 02:34:32 PMMaybe people think of them as necessary tools used to facilitate politics/business (and even personal vendettas).
Good points, Molten Heart, and we can definitely make sure that is elaborated on for discussion. I think the piece I quoted from you is closest to how it is planned for implementation.
This is exciting! It's the way I always thought it should work, double blind and dripping in money. I like.
This looks really promising! I've got a couple of initial thoughts:
A link to the social caste system should probably be provided so there's no confusion. It should also be clarified what "higher social status" means. Is it simply to say that a commoner can't put a hit out on a Chosen? Or are we going to get into different levels of status within castes as well? Can a junior Chosen Lady put a contract out on the head of House Dasari? Can an apprentice bard put a contract on a master bard? Can a junior merchant of House Kadius put a contract on a senior agent of House Kurac? How does being somebody's partisan modify your social status, if at all? And if a templar rejects my contract because he says I'm not the right social status, what if I just go straight to another templar who accepts it?
I feel like the fewer "shalls" and "shalt nots" and "this always will happen" and "this will never happen" type statement the docs make, the stronger they'll be and the easier it will be to work with them. Like janeshephard said, the docs shouldn't be so rigid as to not allow rules to be broken when it's in someone's interest. If there are too many rules around the system, and they're all rigid, you may wind up with different players/characters seeing things differently, and making judgement calls on who can contract who that other players or staff won't agree with, and then things could get ugly.
My suggestion: make the rules on social status very broad and only really enforcable in that commoners can't place hits on Chosen directly. And then say that templars have to honor contracts agreed to by other templars, but not every templar has to have the same standards on what contracts they'll accept vs. reject.
Quote from: Nyr on September 26, 2013, 02:39:56 PM
Quote from: Molten Heart on September 26, 2013, 02:34:32 PMMaybe people think of them as necessary tools used to facilitate politics/business (and even personal vendettas).
Good points, Molten Heart, and we can definitely make sure that is elaborated on for discussion. I think the piece I quoted from you is closest to how it is planned for implementation.
I think the system might be viewed by Tulukis as a civilized, orderly, and efficient way of settling scores and resolving disputes within the city, and as a means to limit collateral damage. "In Tuluk, you see, we're surgical and precise in how we tend to our vendettas, unlike the ugly messes they have in Allanak." In this way, the documented licensing system would be like Kanly in the world of Dune (http://dune.wikia.com/wiki/Kanly) (one of my personal favorite parts about that world!).
Quote from: Jherlen on September 26, 2013, 02:52:47 PM
This looks really promising! I've got a couple of initial thoughts:
A link to the social caste system should probably be provided so there's no confusion. It should also be clarified what "higher social status" means. Is it simply to say that a commoner can't put a hit out on a Chosen? Or are we going to get into different levels of status within castes as well? Can a junior Chosen Lady put a contract out on the head of House Dasari? Can an apprentice bard put a contract on a master bard? Can a junior merchant of House Kadius put a contract on a senior agent of House Kurac? How does being somebody's partisan modify your social status, if at all? And if a templar rejects my contract because he says I'm not the right social status, what if I just go straight to another templar who accepts it?
I feel like the fewer "shalls" and "shalt nots" and "this always will happen" and "this will never happen" type statement the docs make, the stronger they'll be and the easier it will be to work with them. Like janeshephard said, the docs shouldn't be so rigid as to not allow rules to be broken when it's in someone's interest. If there are too many rules around the system, and they're all rigid, you may wind up with different players/characters seeing things differently, and making judgement calls on who can contract who that other players or staff won't agree with, and then things could get ugly.
My suggestion: make the rules on social status very broad and only really enforcable in that commoners can't place hits on Chosen directly. And then say that templars have to honor contracts agreed to by other templars, but not every templar has to have the same standards on what contracts they'll accept vs. reject.
A long time ago, on the old website, there used to be a kind of grid or chart detailing where on the list a typical role would fall in the social ranking systems. It had a few columns - merchant house employees, nobility, templarate, unaffiliated commoners, bards, etc - and where they fell in the caste system in relation to their peers and betters.
I feel like if that chart still exists (there was one for Allanak too), it'd be nice to see it on the new website. It probably could use a revamp or two, but it would be very useful for people who wish to properly use Shadow Artists.
Quote from: LauraMars on September 26, 2013, 02:56:21 PM
A long time ago, on the old website, there used to be a kind of grid or chart detailing where on the list a typical role would fall in the social ranking systems. It had a few columns - merchant house employees, nobility, templarate, unaffiliated commoners, bards, etc - and where they fell in the caste system in relation to their peers and betters.
I feel like if that chart still exists (there was one for Allanak too), it'd be nice to see it on the new website. It probably could use a revamp or two, but it would be very useful for people who wish to properly use Shadow Artists.
It's still around, I actually looked at it a couple of hours ago :)
http://old.armageddon.org/rp/tuluk_castes.html
Will this new system supplant the old one?
Quote from: Malken on September 26, 2013, 03:04:35 PMIt's still around, I actually looked at it a couple of hours ago :)
http://old.armageddon.org/rp/tuluk_castes.html
Yeah that's the one! I think a chart like that captures the feel of political nuances more than simply saying "yeah, chosen are better than clanned merchants are better than nobody hunters."
I really like that there is more emphasis on caste and social status now.
Coincidentally, the only time I've ever been assassinated in Tuluk was as a legionnaire by another legionnaire. I guess that will no longer be possible since legionnaires can only be annoyed at best it seems. Its understandable given the circumstances, the templars wouldn't want their trained soldiers to get killed but still feel a bit unfortunate.
I'm wondering if taking a contract against someone will become a bit of a gamble or a sure thing now? It seems to me, you pay the Templar and he handles the rest. So what happens to the contract if the artist fails? Do you have to pay again to have another attempt? Does the templar keep trying until the contract you paid for succeeds? What if you can pay but the Templar there aren't any PC shadow artist who can pull off the task with an remote chance of success?
Quote from: Blur on September 26, 2013, 03:12:49 PM
Coincidentally, the only time I've ever been assassinated in Tuluk was as a legionnaire by another legionnaire. I guess that will no longer be possible since legionnaires can only be annoyed at best it seems. Its understandable given the circumstances, the templars wouldn't want their trained soldiers to get killed but still feel a bit unfortunate.
If you could put out contracts on Legion you could kill the government's enforcers that way. Keeping them free from harm reinforces their special status.
Quote
I'm wondering if taking a contract against someone will become a bit of a gamble or a sure thing now? It seems to me, you pay the Templar and he handles the rest. So what happens to the contract if the artist fails? Do you have to pay again to have another attempt? Does the templar keep trying until the contract you paid for succeeds? What if you can pay but the Templar there aren't any PC shadow artist who can pull off the task with an remote chance of success?
And what happens if you take out a contract on the Templar's new pet/partisan? Paperwork goes missing? Is redirected against you? Oh, sure, the contract terms are correct, Mr. Amos. Why, I'll have it filed and notarized immediately. Don't you worry! Mwhahaha.
A chart is definitely better than no chart, but if social rank to that detail is going to be used to determine who can contract against who... I dunno. It feels like it could be a straight jacket.
The thing about social influence and power politics is that the titles don't reflect the reality, and that's true in Zalanthas more than ever. Even in the same column on that chart I can think of a lot of instances where a do-nothing lazearound with a higher title probably has had less actual political clout than an up-and-comer. Is anyone worried that a social chart like this that says person A is untouchable by person B because of titles, even when in game reality might reflect otherwise, might get in the way of plots?
If things were left up to the (PC) templars' discretion, and they had a wide latitude to make the call, I'd be happy as a clam. That brings some of the C in MCB back into Tuluk, too.
Quote from: manonfire on September 26, 2013, 03:05:44 PM
Will this new system supplant the old one?
IIRC this system is basically the same as the old (except with the double blind method of hiring artists which was always an option but now always the case), and it's documented much better.
The double blind method seems less messy and more mysterious, not to mention more useful for political machinations.
Quote from: janeshephard on September 26, 2013, 03:15:28 PM
Quote from: Blur on September 26, 2013, 03:12:49 PM
Coincidentally, the only time I've ever been assassinated in Tuluk was as a legionnaire by another legionnaire. I guess that will no longer be possible since legionnaires can only be annoyed at best it seems. Its understandable given the circumstances, the templars wouldn't want their trained soldiers to get killed but still feel a bit unfortunate.
If you could put out contracts on Legion you could kill the government's enforcers that way. Keeping them free from harm reinforces their special status.
Considering that the legionnarie's work for the templarate, I would think that maybe it wasn't a normal contract. So this would be outside of the normal system, or as an illegal assassination. While not knowing the details, it's possible a templar ordered this. At least that seems like something that'd happen. I know some templars don't mind getting blood on their hands but some may to keep their hands clean, while keeping their tools sharp. ;-)
Quote
Quote
I'm wondering if taking a contract against someone will become a bit of a gamble or a sure thing now? It seems to me, you pay the Templar and he handles the rest. So what happens to the contract if the artist fails? Do you have to pay again to have another attempt? Does the templar keep trying until the contract you paid for succeeds? What if you can pay but the Templar there aren't any PC shadow artist who can pull off the task with an remote chance of success?
And what happens if you take out a contract on the Templar's new pet/partisan? Paperwork goes missing? Is redirected against you? Oh, sure, the contract terms are correct, Mr. Amos. Why, I'll have it filed and notarized immediately. Don't you worry! Mwhahaha.
While partisans aren't exempt from the law, I think it would depend on politics to determine how that would go. It would depend on which templar one is inquiring with about the contract and their relationship to the templar/partisan in question. But really, this probably true in some degree with all shadow artist contract someone applies for.
Let me start by saying that I'm not really sure how the present system works. It's a mystery to me, overall. However...
I think that the "you can never refuse a contract" thing would make me a lot less likely to ever play a shadow artist. If someone decides to take out a contract on your friend or your lover, you're the person who is most easily able to kill them. You can't say no. Your friends and lovers must thus be of higher social standing then everyone else, and still not annoy any of the Chosen or Faithful. I suppose you could only make friends and lovers with Legionnaires.
Can a shadow artist even be lifesworn to a Chosen House? The docs all talk about "patrons". If you're a journeyman shadow artist who wants to work for a House, you should never aspire to more, because you might have to kill the people you work for. Or... They might kill you, since you could now be a tool against them. I don't know, it feels to me like you could never, ever really trust any shadow artist (be you an employer or a friend/lover). Furthermore, why would you want to patron a shadow artist? You can't hire your own shadow artist for shadow artist things anyway. The Faithful could literally hire anyone to do your task. So... Why pour in all that effort?
Finally, why is the example of death a bard whose song you don't want to hear? It gives the impression that killing off bards because they sing a song you don't like is commonplace.
This is really neat, but what I'm curious about is how new PCs, for example, fit into this. If I wanted to play a shadow artist, would I immediately register in game, or is this something I would do after time spent training and practicing in game?
What I'm getting at is: Are shadow artists intended to be already proficient sneaky sneaks, or do they range from novice burglar to master assassin?
Quote
Sorry to be so bold from the main page on Shadow Artists:
"The templarate acts as a broker, and will not reject a contract for any reasons other than the hiring party's lack of social status or their being unable to pay the established fee. "
I somehow see this rule being broken if its not in the interest of the Templar.
No need to worry about being so bold! I wouldn't have put that there if it wasn't going to be the case. We've actually been talking these over with the PC templars for the past month. They'll have their own set of documentation governing what they can do with this, and the general public docs (these) are exactly right: templars will be above the system, outside of the system, and brokering the system. Their task is not to manipulate, at least not in THIS area.
Quote from: Jherlen on September 26, 2013, 02:52:47 PM
A link to the social caste system should probably be provided so there's no confusion. It should also be clarified what "higher social status" means. Is it simply to say that a commoner can't put a hit out on a Chosen?
A commoner can't go to a templar and put a hit out on a Chosen, no.
A commoner could go to another Chosen (perhaps a rival to that noble?) and after the appropriate amount of pleasantries, they can put out feelers about whether or not the
Quote
Or are we going to get into different levels of status within castes as well? Can a junior Chosen Lady put a contract out on the head of House Dasari? Can an apprentice bard put a contract on a master bard? Can a junior merchant of House Kadius put a contract on a senior agent of House Kurac?
To a large extent, yes, we are prepared to move into different levels of status within castes as well. Some have pointed out the old caste chart. We'd love to move it to the new website, but we do not presently have a way to display tables like that. I will be working with Morgenes to come up with a way to display it. There are some things that need to be consolidated and clarified. There are other things that need to be stripped out entirely and updated. Is the chart format the best way to display this? Not sure, if you have a better idea that works with our current format for webpages, please let us know.
To answer specifically:Junior Chosen Lady < Head of House, but Head of House is = to Head of House. Junior Chosen Lady should find a Head of House that is happy to help, for a "price"...
Apprentice bard < Masterbard, but Masterbard is = to Masterbard (and noble is > Masterbard, too). Apprentice bard should find someone of the appropriate rank that is happy to help, for a "price"...
Junior Merchant of House Kadius < Senior Agent of House Kurac, but Senior Agent of House Kadius is fairly = to Senior Agent of House Kurac (and nobles are > than that too). Junior Merchant should find someone of the appropriate rank that is happy to help, for a "price"...
QuoteHow does being somebody's partisan modify your social status, if at all?
In the context of general social status in Tuluk in history, being the partisan of someone of influence raises your status more than someone that is not a partisan of someone of influence. It's a soft boost, not a clear-cut one. Maybe that needs to be better defined.
In the context of contracts, the more high in social status a patron is, the farther their influence goes (in the most base ways, it means "they can get more folks killed).
QuoteAnd if a templar rejects my contract because he says I'm not the right social status, what if I just go straight to another templar who accepts it?
You will only be rejected for lack of social status or being unable to pay for the cost of an artist...period. There's no going to another templar to have them do it; you have to get a patron that can do it or not do it at all.
QuoteI feel like the fewer "shalls" and "shalt nots" and "this always will happen" and "this will never happen" type statement the docs make, the stronger they'll be and the easier it will be to work with them. Like janeshephard said, the docs shouldn't be so rigid as to not allow rules to be broken when it's in someone's interest. If there are too many rules around the system, and they're all rigid, you may wind up with different players/characters seeing things differently, and making judgement calls on who can contract who that other players or staff won't agree with, and then things could get ugly.
That's why templars have a separate set of documentation that governs how they broker this system. In general I agree with you but I'd rather make it clear in this case so that it becomes part of the culture.
If you're contracting out to have someone killed, you don't get to find out who's doing it unless they work for you and you want them to do it. Do you have suspicions? Sure. Are you reasonably sure you know who got picked? You might, if you've got a good information network going. Do you mention that? Nope, you really shouldn't! That'll get you in trouble.
If you're contracted out to have someone killed, you don't get to find out who's hiring you unless you work for them. Do you have suspicions? Probably. Are you reasonable sure you know why this is being done? You might, if you're paying attention. Do you say anything about it? Nope, you really shouldn't! That'll get you in trouble.
It doesn't mean that people won't talk, but the wording is meant to imply that you shouldn't...and if you do, you're going to face some problems.
QuoteMy suggestion: make the rules on social status very broad and only really enforcable in that commoners can't place hits on Chosen directly. And then say that templars have to honor contracts agreed to by other templars, but not every templar has to have the same standards on what contracts they'll accept vs. reject.
That latter part might be in something just for templars.
Quote from: manonfire on September 26, 2013, 03:05:44 PM
Will this new system supplant the old one?
Yes, once it is live and "occurs" IC, it will supplant the old one.
Quote from: Blur on September 26, 2013, 03:12:49 PM
I'm wondering if taking a contract against someone will become a bit of a gamble or a sure thing now? It seems to me, you pay the Templar and he handles the rest. So what happens to the contract if the artist fails? Do you have to pay again to have another attempt? Does the templar keep trying until the contract you paid for succeeds? What if you can pay but the Templar there aren't any PC shadow artist who can pull off the task with an remote chance of success?
That's ready for the templar-side docs but probably needs to be available for the agent as well. An excerpt:
Being awarded and pursuing a contract
- Scenario 1: A templar meets with Amos to let him know he has a contract available. He must kill Talia, a burgeoning merchant that Salarr wants out of the picture...Salarr also wants the body gone, for whatever reason, leaving no traces. Amos accepts the contract and gets half of his cut of the payment up front. Amos kills Talia and does it perfectly, the body is dealt with, he doesn't get caught. He gets his payment.
- Scenario 2: Amos kills Talia, but fails to deal with the body properly (or he is caught or his involvement is discovered). The templarate (in meeting with him afterwards) will punish him. He will not get the rest of his payment. The agent gets a quarter of their fee back because the contract WAS completed, just not to specifications.
- Scenario 3: Amos fails to kill Talia and botches it, but not too terribly. That's bad enough, so perhaps the templarate inks him as an incompetent assassin and refuses to give him more contracts. He pays back the 'sid he was paid and he will be dealt with in some fashion. The original person paying for the contract is paid half back. The Templarate keeps their cut.
- Scenario 4: Amos fails to kill Talia and botches it horribly; practically everyone has heard about it. The templarate disappears Amos. The original person paying for the contract is paid half back. The templarate keeps their cut.
- Scenario 5: Amos fails to kill Talia. Talia kills Amos. The templarate pays (out of pocket) half of the sid to the original contractor. The templarate keeps no cut.
Just an idea of how that might work. Honestly in Scenario 5, the Templarate should pay Talia for saving them the trouble.
Quote from: Jherlen on September 26, 2013, 03:24:40 PM
A chart is definitely better than no chart, but if social rank to that detail is going to be used to determine who can contract against who... I dunno. It feels like it could be a straight jacket.
The thing about social influence and power politics is that the titles don't reflect the reality, and that's true in Zalanthas more than ever. Even in the same column on that chart I can think of a lot of instances where a do-nothing lazearound with a higher title probably has had less actual political clout than an up-and-comer. Is anyone worried that a social chart like this that says person A is untouchable by person B because of titles, even when in game reality might reflect otherwise, might get in the way of plots?
If things were left up to the (PC) templars' discretion, and they had a wide latitude to make the call, I'd be happy as a clam. That brings some of the C in MCB back into Tuluk, too.
If an up and comer has clout but no standing an option is to involve someone with standing. (This may be so obvious as to go without saying. I'm doing a drive by posting from work. It won't always work of course but if you don't have the power to get it done the chart is right after all. )
Quote from: Malken on September 26, 2013, 03:04:35 PM
Quote from: LauraMars on September 26, 2013, 02:56:21 PM
A long time ago, on the old website, there used to be a kind of grid or chart detailing where on the list a typical role would fall in the social ranking systems. It had a few columns - merchant house employees, nobility, templarate, unaffiliated commoners, bards, etc - and where they fell in the caste system in relation to their peers and betters.
I feel like if that chart still exists (there was one for Allanak too), it'd be nice to see it on the new website. It probably could use a revamp or two, but it would be very useful for people who wish to properly use Shadow Artists.
It's still around, I actually looked at it a couple of hours ago :)
http://old.armageddon.org/rp/tuluk_castes.html
Can we get an update on social caste based on this. However, I'm a bit confused. An independent hunter, for example would be considered at the same caste as a skilled slave. That's a bit shocking.
Gotta go for now but I'll get to this later. One more thing.
Quote from: janeshephard on September 26, 2013, 03:15:28 PM
And what happens if you take out a contract on the Templar's new pet/partisan? Paperwork goes missing? Is redirected against you? Oh, sure, the contract terms are correct, Mr. Amos. Why, I'll have it filed and notarized immediately. Don't you worry! Mwhahaha.
I guess Templars better not have pets or partisans they aren't willing to lose, eh?
Quote from: Taven on September 26, 2013, 03:45:32 PM
I think that the "you can never refuse a contract" thing would make me a lot less likely to ever play a shadow artist. If someone decides to take out a contract on your friend or your lover, you're the person who is most easily able to kill them. You can't say no. Your friends and lovers must thus be of higher social standing then everyone else, and still not annoy any of the Chosen or Faithful. I suppose you could only make friends and lovers with Legionnaires.
If you choose--
voluntarily--to play a shadow artist, this is what you have to deal with.
No one is forcing you to play a shadow artist that is an assassin, but if you do, you have to be okay with the idea that you might well have to betray/kill someone you care about for the sake of a contract. This game is about murder, corruption, and betrayal; if you don't want to be doing that,
definitely stay out of this kind of role.
You could also just be an artist that doesn't kill people.
QuoteCan a shadow artist even be lifesworn to a Chosen House?
Sure. They just won't ever be a master unless they hide that fact from their House, but that'd never happen...right?
QuoteThe docs all talk about "patrons". If you're a journeyman shadow artist who wants to work for a House, you should never aspire to more, because you might have to kill the people you work for.
Unless you want to.
QuoteOr... They might kill you, since you could now be a tool against them.
Yep.
QuoteI don't know, it feels to me like you could never, ever really trust any shadow artist (be you an employer or a friend/lover). Furthermore, why would you want to patron a shadow artist?
Because you'd be able to use them for contracts if you wanted to do so.
QuoteYou can't hire your own shadow artist for shadow artist things anyway.
You absolutely can. It says so.
QuoteThe Faithful could literally hire anyone to do your task.
Not if you want to use one of your artists.
QuoteSo... Why pour in all that effort?
See above!
QuoteFinally, why is the example of death a bard whose song you don't want to hear? It gives the impression that killing off bards because they sing a song you don't like is commonplace.
...that's not intended to be an example of death, I was thinking more of poisoning a bard with something that would keep them from performing rather than something that would keep them from living. Maybe it can be made more clear.
THIS SYSTEM IS NOT JUST FOR KILLING PEOPLE, IT'S FOR LOTS OF STUFF, ALL HAVING TO DO WITH SENDING A MESSAGE.There! :)
Quote from: Molten Heart on September 26, 2013, 03:27:44 PM
Quote from: manonfire on September 26, 2013, 03:05:44 PM
Will this new system supplant the old one?
IIRC this system is basically the same as the old (except with the double blind method of hiring artists which was always an option but now always the case), and it's documented much better.
Not the way I interpret it, though I could be completely mistaken.
Currently, a thieves license is simply a way to say to the templars "Hi, I'm a thief/burglar. I'm going to be robbing people blind. I'd like your blessing to do so, and in return I promise to do my best not to be completely abysmal at it. I'm in no way required to take contracts from anyone unless I wish to do so."
The way I'm reading this, registering as a shadow artist is basically becoming a private contractor to the citizens of Tuluk, and not every criminal is interested in doing that.
When the current system goes away and is replaced with this, will the thieves/burglars/assassins that choose not to partake in it be treated the way unlicensed criminals are now?
Quote from: slvrmoontiger on September 26, 2013, 03:54:06 PM
Quote from: Malken on September 26, 2013, 03:04:35 PM
Quote from: LauraMars on September 26, 2013, 02:56:21 PM
A long time ago, on the old website, there used to be a kind of grid or chart detailing where on the list a typical role would fall in the social ranking systems. It had a few columns - merchant house employees, nobility, templarate, unaffiliated commoners, bards, etc - and where they fell in the caste system in relation to their peers and betters.
I feel like if that chart still exists (there was one for Allanak too), it'd be nice to see it on the new website. It probably could use a revamp or two, but it would be very useful for people who wish to properly use Shadow Artists.
It's still around, I actually looked at it a couple of hours ago :)
http://old.armageddon.org/rp/tuluk_castes.html
Can we get an update on social caste based on this. However, I'm a bit confused. An independent hunter, for example would be considered at the same caste as a skilled slave. That's a bit shocking.
That is actually close to correct. A skilled slave has more worth than an independent hunter.
Quote from: Nyr on September 26, 2013, 03:55:35 PMYou absolutely can. It says so.
You are right. I missed this:
Quote from: BETA docsContracts provided by your patron may be discussed with the patron. This is considered a necessary part of training up the city-state's artists. However, contracts for other parties (which remain unknown to you) may not be discussed with anyone, including your patron.
I stand corrected for that point. This makes far more sense then the way I had understood it. :)
I think adding a bullet point to the list on this page (http://armageddon.org/help/view/Shadow%20Artists) about the patron thing might be useful, although I realize that it does spell it out more over here (http://armageddon.org/help/view/Shadow%20Artist%20FAQ).
Quote from: Nyr on September 26, 2013, 03:55:35 PMQuoteFinally, why is the example of death a bard whose song you don't want to hear? It gives the impression that killing off bards because they sing a song you don't like is commonplace.
...that's not intended to be an example of death, I was thinking more of poisoning a bard with something that would keep them from performing rather than something that would keep them from living. Maybe it can be made more clear.
Good deal.
Quote from: Nyr on September 26, 2013, 04:06:34 PM
That is actually close to correct. A skilled slave has more worth than an independent hunter.
Not to derail, but for what it's worth, we need this to become more apparent in the game. There's a lot of fun reasons to stay out on your own and jump on a plot bandwagon when you see it.
I know a quick way to do it: a life-sworn only bar :) Or more apparent restrictions if you're not clearly in a faction.
While it might be a foolish choice, would Chosen or merchant house family members be able to be shadow artists?
Quote from: Nyr on September 26, 2013, 03:55:35 PM
Quote from: janeshephard on September 26, 2013, 03:15:28 PM
And what happens if you take out a contract on the Templar's new pet/partisan? Paperwork goes missing? Is redirected against you? Oh, sure, the contract terms are correct, Mr. Amos. Why, I'll have it filed and notarized immediately. Don't you worry! Mwhahaha.
I guess Templars better not have pets or partisans they aren't willing to lose, eh?
This is the kind of thing I'm worried about when I see docs try and impose such a strict system like this. I'm
sure templars will have pets and partisans they aren't willing to lose, unless they are robots with no emotions and value the abstract rules of a system more than they value something that gives them personal power and utility. There should be room for corrupt templars who "forget" contracts, or find out that another templar contracted somebody against their man, and that shadow agent disappears.
Likewise, as Taven said, there should be room for an artist who does value his work and his reputation over personal relationships, and is willing to kill his lover and family - but this type of person is most certainly a sociopath. That's fine! But as written, this stuff implies
everybody in Tuluk who is a shadow artist is essentially a sociopath, and that there's no room for a character who is a skilled assassin or thief by trade, but also has some boundaries she isn't willing to cross or people she isn't willing to hurt.
Consider the other implications too. If you as a Tuluki know a shadow artist is obligated to kill/maim/embarass/steal from you as soon as a templar walks up and tells them, do you want to be associating with that person at all? It's one thing if you're not aware, but shadow artists get tattoos, so if you're that person's lover or family member you're probably gonna notice sooner or later. It seems like it would be very difficult to have meaningful social relationships while roleplaying a shadow artist, in addition to the sociopathic tendencies.
The problem isn't that shadow artists sound like that, it's that it sounds like this is all they'll realistically be able to be. That might be fun for some people, but it could be so much more if the absolutes were relaxed and some more variation were allowed in.
One final thought: what happens to criminals who want to work outside the bounds of this system? What happens to people who work with/hire them?
Hey Nyr, I think that you should also had an option where shadow artists could be information gatherers, where someone pays to have all the dirt and information gathered on someone else, and the fee paid could be in relation to the depth of the information gathered by the artist.
Quote from: Molten Heart on September 26, 2013, 04:17:48 PM
While it might be a foolish choice, would Chosen or merchant house family members be able to be shadow artists?
The Chosen are already exempt to most laws, so it'd probably make very little sense for one to be a shadow artist. They gain social status through other means after all. As for GMH family... It'd most likely be a quick way to reassignment, though maybe it'd still be a viable option in some cases.
Quote from: Jherlen on September 26, 2013, 04:32:46 PM
One final thought: what happens to criminals who want to work outside the bounds of this system? What happens to people who work with/hire them?
They're criminals, like you said, and will probably be treated as such. That's how things are now. Working with a criminal, hiring them? That's bad from a social standing point of view. A lack of respect and appreciation of Tuluki tradition and law sounds like an unhealthy path to walk.
Quote from: Jherlen on September 26, 2013, 04:32:46 PM
One final thought: what happens to criminals who want to work outside the bounds of this system? What happens to people who work with/hire them?
I'm curious about this as well. It almost seems like there's no reason to be a lawless criminal when you can do all the same things for the Templarate (which is probably intentional but... I'd still like to see a real Tuluki criminal role flourish).
Quote from: Jherlen on September 26, 2013, 04:32:46 PM
One final thought: what happens to criminals who want to work outside the bounds of this system? What happens to people who work with/hire them?
THE SAME THING THAT HAPPENS TO EVERYONE ELSE
(http://30.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_kslr9xtbTA1qziyd9o1_500.png)
Quote from: Jherlen on September 26, 2013, 04:32:46 PM
Quote from: Nyr on September 26, 2013, 03:55:35 PM
Quote from: janeshephard on September 26, 2013, 03:15:28 PM
And what happens if you take out a contract on the Templar's new pet/partisan? Paperwork goes missing? Is redirected against you? Oh, sure, the contract terms are correct, Mr. Amos. Why, I'll have it filed and notarized immediately. Don't you worry! Mwhahaha.
I guess Templars better not have pets or partisans they aren't willing to lose, eh?
This is the kind of thing I'm worried about when I see docs try and impose such a strict system like this. I'm sure templars will have pets and partisans they aren't willing to lose, unless they are robots with no emotions and value the abstract rules of a system more than they value something that gives them personal power and utility. There should be room for corrupt templars who "forget" contracts, or find out that another templar contracted somebody against their man, and that shadow agent disappears.
Likewise, as Taven said, there should be room for an artist who does value his work and his reputation over personal relationships, and is willing to kill his lover and family - but this type of person is most certainly a sociopath. That's fine! But as written, this stuff implies everybody in Tuluk who is a shadow artist is essentially a sociopath, and that there's no room for a character who is a skilled assassin or thief by trade, but also has some boundaries she isn't willing to cross or people she isn't willing to hurt.
Consider the other implications too. If you as a Tuluki know a shadow artist is obligated to kill/maim/embarass/steal from you as soon as a templar walks up and tells them, do you want to be associating with that person at all? It's one thing if you're not aware, but shadow artists get tattoos, so if you're that person's lover or family member you're probably gonna notice sooner or later. It seems like it would be very difficult to have meaningful social relationships while roleplaying a shadow artist, in addition to the sociopathic tendencies.
The problem isn't that shadow artists sound like that, it's that it sounds like this is all they'll realistically be able to be. That might be fun for some people, but it could be so much more if the absolutes were relaxed and some more variation were allowed in.
Not all Shadow Artists will be assassins by trade. Some will be various kinds of thieves etc. My understanding is that Shadow Artists must be ready to set their personal agendas aside and do what the Faithful require of them. Unaffiliated people involved with Shadow Artists who are either of another affiliation or unaffiliated will be at risk of being targeted. I think there's some paranoia related to associating with the current types of artists (thieves/assassins) already, and it will be more formalized with the new approach. It does seem limiting for those who have various moral boundries, I agree with that.
Quote from: Jherlen on September 26, 2013, 04:32:46 PM
This is the kind of thing I'm worried about when I see docs try and impose such a strict system like this. I'm sure templars will have pets and partisans they aren't willing to lose, unless they are robots with no emotions and value the abstract rules of a system more than they value something that gives them personal power and utility. There should be room for corrupt templars who "forget" contracts, or find out that another templar contracted somebody against their man, and that shadow agent disappears.
One solution. Since His Legion is exempt from contract killings, all aides/partisans/whathaveyous end up as servants in His Legion or you're going to have a conflict of interest. Heck, you'll have that "recruit" in His Legion stay a recruit forever and just report to the one Faithful :) It's a little too brazen to do it that way though.
Quote
Likewise, as Taven said, there should be room for an artist who does value his work and his reputation over personal relationships, and is willing to kill his lover and family - but this type of person is most certainly a sociopath. That's fine! But as written, this stuff implies everybody in Tuluk who is a shadow artist is essentially a sociopath, and that there's no room for a character who is a skilled assassin or thief by trade, but also has some boundaries she isn't willing to cross or people she isn't willing to hurt.
This is a fair point. An artist should be able to say "sorry, not for me" but of course never mention that a hit is out or risk breaking the code.
Quote
Consider the other implications too. If you as a Tuluki know a shadow artist is obligated to kill/maim/embarass/steal from you as soon as a templar walks up and tells them, do you want to be associating with that person at all? It's one thing if you're not aware, but shadow artists get tattoos, so if you're that person's lover or family member you're probably gonna notice sooner or later. It seems like it would be very difficult to have meaningful social relationships while roleplaying a shadow artist, in addition to the sociopathic tendencies.
A master artist who is known to be a master artist would end up like Severian from The Shadow of the Torturer. No one would want to associate with him, and innkeepers would ask him to eat his food quickly and leave.
Quote
One final thought: what happens to criminals who want to work outside the bounds of this system? What happens to people who work with/hire them?
Tuluk is very oppressive of those who live without regard to its laws.
EDIT:
BTW, I think the social status thing is very good. If it was more fleshed out and official in the docs it would give people motivation to rise up in the ranks of GMHs and Noble Houses.
I keep coming back to the notion that a Shadow Artist is the Tuluki version of a gemmer.
I'm curious how this affects PCs who operate under the current system.
If they're given a choice between doing the Shadow Artist thing and the alternative and they go for the latter, they suddenly find themselves existing outside the good graces of the templarate.
Quote from: manonfire on September 26, 2013, 05:13:32 PM
I keep coming back to the notion that a Shadow Artist is the Tuluki version of a gemmer.
I'm kind of worried it will play out the same way, except using them as Seal Team Six Uber Hit Squad is no longer limited to the Templarate.
Quote from: manonfire on September 26, 2013, 05:13:32 PM
I keep coming back to the notion that a Shadow Artist is the Tuluki version of a gemmer.
That's a sort of good analogy. Gemmed, though, get their gems because they HAVE to, more or less, and while they can't really say no to templars directly, they can still hate them and avoid them. Shadow Artists sound like they do it because they WANT to work for the templars, and they're willing to place allegiance to the Faithful above everything else in their whole life up to and including their friends and loved ones. Moreover, they know whatever is asked they can't refuse, so while an "old school" criminal can laugh in someone's face if offered 200 sid for a very hard job, a Shadow Artist has to say okay I'll do it because you say so.
These sound like people who would end up working for templars anyway whether there was a formal system in place or not. Short of adding another way to play a fanatical devotee to Tuluk, what else is this adding to the city?
Quote from: HavokBlue on September 26, 2013, 05:18:31 PM
Quote from: manonfire on September 26, 2013, 05:13:32 PM
I keep coming back to the notion that a Shadow Artist is the Tuluki version of a gemmer.
I'm kind of worried it will play out the same way, except using them as Seal Team Six Uber Hit Squad is no longer limited to the Templarate.
Except that some will not be publicly known, and those who are publicly known will actually be able to work up a decent amount of social status/rank based on their accomplishments in the shadow arts. They won't be feared or shunned in the same way, though I suppose there could be some similarities.
Shadow artists don't work for templars per se. They work for the contracting agent. They just don't know who that is. The templarate is the cutout between the two.
Some of the docs are not up that should be and some are mixed in with the templar stuff. I had better dig them out!
Will try to answer more after class. Thanks for the feedback, it should improve the final product.
I personally like the fact that it makes social relationships more awkward. If you're in a "So I Mated A Shadow Artist" situation, shouldn't that make RP more interesting? And shouldn't it apply the same way if you're a shadow artist mated to a prime target? It adds a thick layer of conflict to an area where players on the GDB often bemoan the smiley-happy nature of it all.
I think this kind of clarification/updating to the Shadow Artist system is both due and welcome. I also agree with many of Jherlen's points, particularly the difficulties in an Artist never being able to refuse a contract.
Not sure on the solution to that difficulty, though.
Quote from: Nyr on September 26, 2013, 05:43:50 PM
Shadow artists don't work for templars per se. They work for the contracting agent. They just don't know who that is. The templarate is the cutout between the two.
And the double-blind system with a broker in between the contractor and the agent is one of the parts of the system I like. When you make that broker explicitly the templarate, though, the question of who an agent is working for starts becoming academic. The templars are the ones telling them what they will be doing and how much they will be paid. There is no room for negotiating the terms and no room for refusal on behalf of the artist. The former is fine, the latter is where it becomes way too restrictive. Loosening that part up to say the artist has the option to refuse (but must keep his silence), but artists who start refusing too many contracts will probably stop getting them, would go a long way.
The system also seems like it would benefit from a more neutral broker. Templars (at least PC templars) are typically anything but neutral when it comes to city politics, and I don't think we want to encourage them not to be. Are there alternatives to having templars administrate a system which could be used by their own enemies to work against them? Maybe a new, true-neutral templarate-backed, templarate-protected organization of some sort?
Maybe if instead of the shadow artist absolutely being unable to refuse a contract, they could be allowed to, but it would be seen as a loss of reputation depending on how ranked the artist was?
An apprentice shadow artist wouldn't lose much reputation by refusing a contract, but it would be "remembered" by the Templar, as opposed to a Master Artist who would take a much bigger hit to his reputation if they were to refuse one, seeing as how at this point their own loyalty would be to Tuluk first and above everything else.
Quote from: Malken on September 26, 2013, 05:57:17 PM
Maybe if instead of the shadow artist absolutely being unable to refuse a contract, they could be allowed to, but it would be seen as a loss of reputation depending on how ranked the artist was?
An apprentice shadow artist wouldn't lose much reputation by refusing a contract, but it would be "remembered" by the Templar, as opposed to a Master Artist who would take a much bigger hit to his reputation if they were to refuse one, seeing as how at this point their own loyalty would be to Tuluk first and above everything else.
Nyr just said they wouldn't work for the Templars. The Templars are just brokers.
If you refuse a contract it should be like refusing work.
Quote from: janeshephard on September 26, 2013, 06:02:23 PM
Quote from: Malken on September 26, 2013, 05:57:17 PM
Maybe if instead of the shadow artist absolutely being unable to refuse a contract, they could be allowed to, but it would be seen as a loss of reputation depending on how ranked the artist was?
An apprentice shadow artist wouldn't lose much reputation by refusing a contract, but it would be "remembered" by the Templar, as opposed to a Master Artist who would take a much bigger hit to his reputation if they were to refuse one, seeing as how at this point their own loyalty would be to Tuluk first and above everything else.
Nyr just said they wouldn't work for the Templars. The Templars are just brokers.
If you refuse a contract it should be like refusing work.
If that's the case, then who decides who's an apprentice artist and who's a Master artist if the Templars are just truly neutral about it all?
If an artist can refuse contracts, it increases the chances of the target finding out (regardless of the contract's goal). That is one reason for no refusal.
Refusal also means that there is a small chance a contract just won't get done because no artist wants to do it. That does not serve the system so well.
As for templars and neutrality...you are right. In general, templars have political bias. In this case, part of their job becomes brokering this system. That means making it work. It sounds as though you don't believe it or feel another group would handle it better. What exactly is the problem with the templarate running it if they run it by these guidelines?
Quote from: Malken on September 26, 2013, 06:06:09 PM
Quote from: janeshephard on September 26, 2013, 06:02:23 PM
Quote from: Malken on September 26, 2013, 05:57:17 PM
Maybe if instead of the shadow artist absolutely being unable to refuse a contract, they could be allowed to, but it would be seen as a loss of reputation depending on how ranked the artist was?
An apprentice shadow artist wouldn't lose much reputation by refusing a contract, but it would be "remembered" by the Templar, as opposed to a Master Artist who would take a much bigger hit to his reputation if they were to refuse one, seeing as how at this point their own loyalty would be to Tuluk first and above everything else.
Nyr just said they wouldn't work for the Templars. The Templars are just brokers.
If you refuse a contract it should be like refusing work.
If that's the case, then who decides who's an apprentice artist and who's a Master artist if the Templars are just truly neutral about it all?
The templarate, based on the quality of work of the artist as well as how much they have done. I already know I need to add more docs. Doh!
Quote from: Nyr on September 26, 2013, 06:06:21 PM
As for templars and neutrality...you are right. In general, templars have political bias. In this case, part of their job becomes brokering this system. That means making it work. It sounds as though you don't believe it or feel another group would handle it better. What exactly is the problem with the templarate running it if they run it by these guidelines?
Problems with Templars running it:
* It's time for a big battle. A northern born GMH Agent shows up and asks for a contract against a Noble's Sergeant (who also happens to be a fearsome warrior and a proven battle veteran). We're not talking internal politics anymore. Removing this Sergeant could hurt the tide of battle. This Sergeant kanked the Agent's mate and stole her.
* A Chosen Lord decides over the course of a month to pay heavily to have key employees removed from another Chosen Lord's House. The Templars are getting valuable information from these employees about southron plans.
I'd give you a third example, but I'm showing you ones that don't involve internal politics -- instead they relate to external threats. If contracts are never refused then a refusal would raise red flags (oh I wonder what that dude has that I don't?). Instead of an artist can refuse, the Templar can sit on the contract for a couple of weeks and then inform the buyer that a suitable artist can't be found for the job.
Of course this also means Templars won't put out contracts on friends and pets.
Quote from: Nyr on September 26, 2013, 06:06:21 PM
If an artist can refuse contracts, it increases the chances of the target finding out (regardless of the contract's goal). That is one reason for no refusal.
Right - but is that so bad? An artist who spills the beans on a contract is a bad artist and can't be trusted with any future work. The templars will have Ways of figuring out who the leak was and closing it. That all sounds like great avenues for intrigue that shouldn't be shut down oocly via documentation.
Quote from: Nyr on September 26, 2013, 06:06:21 PM
Refusal also means that there is a small chance a contract just won't get done because no artist wants to do it. That does not serve the system so well.
If no one wants to do it, maybe that's a sign that the contracting agent needs to make the offer sweeter or less difficult. Once again that seems like a good thing to me, because it makes the negotiation aspect a bit more dynamic?
Quote from: Nyr on September 26, 2013, 06:06:21 PM
As for templars and neutrality...you are right. In general, templars have political bias. In this case, part of their job becomes brokering this system. That means making it work. It sounds as though you don't believe it or feel another group would handle it better. What exactly is the problem with the templarate running it if they run it by these guidelines?
The problem is a few things. First, we keep referring to "the templarate" as if it's one entity that always mostly agrees with itself internally. In Tuluk past, that may or may not have been the case inside the two separate Orders, but now we don't have that. So, hopefully(!!) the Tuluki templarate is going to have internal strife and templars actively working against each other and each other's allies. It's really incongruous to me to think a Tuluki templar is going to participate in administering contracts against his own power base. If he has a lick of sense, the moment he hears that someone has put a job out to mess up his plans, he's going to counter it somehow.
Suppose I'm the templar approached by whoever to kill merchant Talia from your earlier example. You didn't know it, but Talia is my partisan, I'm propping her up and supporting her because I hate Salarr and their stupid high prices. Am I going to just happily take your money to kill Talia at a fair price and then give it to a shadow artist who's good enough to do the job well? Heck no. I'm going to charge you way more than Talia is worth, and/or I'm going to give the job to some dunce who I don't think can actually kill her, if I remember to give the job to anyone at all. Essentially I'm going to be doing everything I can to make the system
not work. Because I'm a templar and I should be able to do that.
"Okay Jherlen," you say, "a good contracting agent will know relationships like that in advance and will pick the right templar to approach and set up the contract." Sure, that's a little better. But now we've admitted that templars will not always be receptive to putting contracts on people, which seems to go against the docs you've laid out, and makes the system a little less trustworthy from the perspective of someone who'd like to set a contract up.
My point is that the system could work one of three ways, and I only like one of those ways:
- Have shadow artists be brokered by some neutral party that's not immediately touchable by your everyday PC templar,
- Allow PC templars to administrate the system fully knowing that if they're smart, they're going to be bending and breaking the rules when it suits them (meaning it won't work nearly so cleanly as you seem to intend from the docs), or
- Force PC templars to do things "by the book", even if it means they're shooting themselves and their ambitions in the foot (which really does not sound very fun for them at all)
A neutral broker removes all these issues, and even lets PC templars participate themselves(!!) because both the agent and artist now know the broker has no stake in the game besides money.
The "can't refuse contracts" is an artist provision. Were either of these scenarios to play out, we can go with one of a few things:
1. It doesn't matter; rules are rules.
2. The broker controls enough in the situation that they can delay it.
3. That will cost you enough to get us some new spies in place.
We will definitely do some more work on it.
As for templars and these scenarios, OK. Cool. Now consider a scenario where templars run the system by these rules.
I will need to pick back up tomorrow. Thanks for the feedback so far, and again, you will be helping make the documentation better (even if what you prefer is not added).
The idea that Templars are not able to save pets from retribution, I feel, is a good thing. People will be more encouraged to be very careful about whose toes they openly step on. And makes the system of 'quiet' retribution with non-lethal action more heavily played upon, opening up bigger plots and spats that last years, not just until you greb enough salt to buy a contract.
As a middle ground, for particularly valued people who have gone and done stupid things, perhaps they can opt to put in a buyout. Where the intended victim is told by their templar that a) cease and desist b) pay for their grievance(an amount that they likely cannot afford, meaning they must turn to a master for help or more humorously be abandoned), or they don't walk out of the meeting.
This would allow for a measure of discretion, and a chance to betray and corrupt during and after trying to scramble to cover your behind.
One more thing that comes to mind:
If the agent generally has no idea who the artist is, is the Templar in the deal responsible for negotiating the artists cost? Will there be a system in place to ensure that more reputable successful shadow artists are getting rewarded more for their work?
Since the system is double-blind, the broker has all the power in negotiating the cost and the artist. So depending who you're after and how the templar feels about it, you might get Nightshade Silentstrike the unparalleled assassin to do your contract for 200 sid (because he can't refuse anyway), or you might get charged 5000 sid for Amos the tall, muscular 0-day burglar. This is why it seems like the broker shouldn't be a political entity so that contracting agents can at least entertain an illusion of fairness and impartiality.
.... or, you get fed up with this system and go hire yourself a REAL criminal, negotiating the hit yourself, at a price you want to pay, knowing who's going to do your dirty work, because you don't trust the Faithful to be in the middle of things. If you really wanted someone dead in Tuluk, what would you rather do?
Quote from: Jherlen on September 26, 2013, 06:25:45 PM
Quote from: Nyr on September 26, 2013, 06:06:21 PM
If an artist can refuse contracts, it increases the chances of the target finding out (regardless of the contract's goal). That is one reason for no refusal.
Right - but is that so bad? An artist who spills the beans on a contract is a bad artist and can't be trusted with any future work. The templars will have Ways of figuring out who the leak was and closing it. That all sounds like great avenues for intrigue that shouldn't be shut down oocly via documentation.
Quote from: Nyr on September 26, 2013, 06:06:21 PM
Refusal also means that there is a small chance a contract just won't get done because no artist wants to do it. That does not serve the system so well.
If no one wants to do it, maybe that's a sign that the contracting agent needs to make the offer sweeter or less difficult. Once again that seems like a good thing to me, because it makes the negotiation aspect a bit more dynamic?
I think there should be a way for an artist to have a "buy out". This is similar to what Malken suggests, but perhaps it could also include countering in coin or something. Coin, favors, some way that
extremely rarely someone could refuse a contract.
Quote from: Kryos on September 26, 2013, 06:47:03 PMThe idea that Templars are not able to save pets from retribution, I feel, is a good thing. People will be more encouraged to be very careful about whose toes they openly step on. And makes the system of 'quiet' retribution with non-lethal action more heavily played upon, opening up bigger plots and spats that last years, not just until you greb enough salt to buy a contract.
Okay, so they can't refuse having a pet killed, but what about killing the shit out of whoever hurt their pet? It seems like a big risk, because even if a templar is forced to sit back and watch someone useful to them die... Are there really going to be no repercussions for the person who contracted the hit? Even if you hire a templar other then the one who's favorite it was, that's no guarantee that the templar whose favorite just died wouldn't find out. They're templars with more means then the average Amos.
If the person asking has equal or more importantly low status Taven, I think not. Again, this forces people to lean towards non-lethal solutions first, trying to send the message, as Nyr says. And since that would promote and prolong conflict: great.
While I'm agreeing with a lot of what Jherlen says, I think you guys are focusing too much on assassinations.
Think outside the box beyond the knife!
Yeah, the main benefit of this system is exactly what Nyr and Kyros said. The old system goes from zero to killing, the new system offers viable opportunities for extended conflict and plotting.
Quote from: Delirium on September 26, 2013, 07:04:51 PM
While I'm agreeing with a lot of what Jherlen says, I think you guys are focusing too much on assassinations.
Think outside the box beyond the knife!
Fair point. Still, though, I can't always see a templar being like "oh sure, go right on ahead and embarass/steal from/maim/break the heart of my partisan, I'm sure it won't affect their work for me at all." Ditto for less-than-lethal contracts against people close to a shadow artist.
Right-of-refusal (or a buyout option) + non-(PC)-templar brokership and I think this could go somewhere. Otherwise I worry it's not going to have the impact or adoption in Tuluk people are hoping for.
Behave (or don't get caught misbehaving) or suffer and die? I think that will have a *big* impact. In some ways, it'll be more brutal than Allanak.
Quote from: Delirium on September 26, 2013, 07:04:51 PM
While I'm agreeing with a lot of what Jherlen says, I think you guys are focusing too much on assassinations.
Think outside the box beyond the knife!
My point applies to things beyond assassination though. If I want to hire a shadow artist to steal Talia's diamond necklace, how do I negotiate for a better artist if I don't know what artist I'm hiring? If I pay the Templar 3000 coins, what guarantee do I have that he isn't going to go set Amos the Day One Burglar on the job? If I'm a 30-Days-Played Burglar and I'm getting contracted to steal things for 200 coins, how do I know the Templar isn't pocketing another 2800? What is my motivation to operate within the system if I'm proficient enough to operate outside it without being caught AND with the power to negotiate my own fees?
Quote from: Cutthroat on September 26, 2013, 07:06:53 PM
Yeah, the main benefit of this system is exactly what Nyr and Kyros said. The old system goes from zero to killing, the new system offers viable opportunities for extended conflict and plotting.
Quote from: Delirium on September 26, 2013, 07:04:51 PM
While I'm agreeing with a lot of what Jherlen says, I think you guys are focusing too much on assassinations.
Think outside the box beyond the knife!
Of course there are lots of options other then assassinations, and lots of other ways to send messages. Those can lead to great conflict and RP, because when someone is dead, that kind of stops anything further (at least with that individual). And it is interesting that the system allows for a lot more non-lethal possibilities.
The reason that assassination is being focused on so much is that when killing people happens that things reach a level where the system might not work. I've got a lot of faith that the templars can broker other people's murders, but nobody likes to have to kill their own dudes. Unless you make some sort of rule like "Templars cannot look into assassinations of their own dudes if it was a contract, or terrible things happen to them", then that could work--
if the citizens all also knew about it.
Quote from: Taven on September 26, 2013, 07:15:19 PM
Quote from: Cutthroat on September 26, 2013, 07:06:53 PM
Yeah, the main benefit of this system is exactly what Nyr and Kyros said. The old system goes from zero to killing, the new system offers viable opportunities for extended conflict and plotting.
Quote from: Delirium on September 26, 2013, 07:04:51 PM
While I'm agreeing with a lot of what Jherlen says, I think you guys are focusing too much on assassinations.
Think outside the box beyond the knife!
Of course there are lots of options other then assassinations, and lots of other ways to send messages. Those can lead to great conflict and RP, because when someone is dead, that kind of stops anything further (at least with that individual). And it is interesting that the system allows for a lot more non-lethal possibilities.
The reason that assassination is being focused on so much is that when killing people happens that things reach a level where the system might not work. I've got a lot of faith that the templars can broker other people's murders, but nobody likes to have to kill their own dudes. Unless you make some sort of rule like "Templars cannot look into assassinations of their own dudes if it was a contract, or terrible things happen to them", then that could work--if the citizens all also knew about it.
I hate to use one liners, so I'll expand, after, but "Welcome to Armageddon."
If you're a registered artist, the reality of your life is that anyone you might hold dear may one day be under your knife. And that feels particularly right for this game, doesn't it?
I have to agree with what other people in the thread are saying - I can't really see a templar realistically being cool with a contract of ANY kind being taken out on their partisan, despite being told by staff that they have to be. Even if the contract is "throw a dung pie in Holten Irofel's face while he's at a competition to make him look bad in public because he spat on my shoes the other day," I think it's more likely they'd do what they can to stop it or hamper it in some way, because that's how politics works - no templar wants to lose face, which is what would happen if someone moved against their partisan.
Anyway to switch topics slightly, let's be hypothetical some more and say the following happens:
There's 3 Shadow Artist pcs registered in the city - one of them happens to be an accomplished assassin, say a Journeyman Shadow Artist. The other two are thief and/or spy types who won't do wet work. For an unrelated reason, Chosen Lord Winrothol is furious with Journeyman Assassasin because her cover story is that she's the bard of his political rival and she wrote a mean song about him. He goes to his local templar and takes out a contract on her TO KILL HER because he's the laughingstock of the city now and is too dumb to know how to deal with it any other way.
What happens?
Does the templar, not being able to refuse a contract:
a) Tell one of the two thiefly types to kill the assassin, even though it's not their specialty
b) Arrest and disappear the assassin for being so politically clumsy
c) Inform Winrothol that shadow artists are immune to contracts (are they?) and blow Journeyman Assassin's cover
d) Comic fourth option ("For your final contract, you must KILL YOURSELF")
?
Quote from: LauraMars on September 26, 2013, 07:19:04 PMThis post
Even Templars have clear and superior masters: their higher ranking templars and ultimately, the Sun King. And if Old Boy Muk says, "this is how it is" any Templar who disagrees is going to disappear themselves. Or, they can try and find wiggle room and risk being vanished for their decision. They too, get to suffer. So great!
Quote from: Kryos on September 26, 2013, 07:18:16 PM
I hate to use one liners, so I'll expand, after, but "Welcome to Armageddon."
If you're a registered artist, the reality of your life is that anyone you might hold dear may one day be under your knife. And that feels particularly right for this game, doesn't it?
Well, I mean... If you're lifesworn to Winrothol, and your mate or friend pisses them off, it could suck for you. If you're a legionnaire, and your beloved breaks the law, could suck for you. If you're in Tenneshi and your mate messes up, Tenneshi could order you to do terrible things!
If you're a Mastershadow artist,
any of the above get pissed off, and it sucks for you. Hell, depending on who your mate is (if they are an indie hunter) some indie hunter could get pissed off at your mate, and, wow, sucks for you.
If I'm going to be forced into murder and betrayal, I wanted it to not be by any random dude in the whole city, you know?
Quote from: Taven on September 26, 2013, 07:25:30 PM
Quote from: Kryos on September 26, 2013, 07:18:16 PM
I hate to use one liners, so I'll expand, after, but "Welcome to Armageddon."
If you're a registered artist, the reality of your life is that anyone you might hold dear may one day be under your knife. And that feels particularly right for this game, doesn't it?
Well, I mean... If you're lifesworn to Winrothol, and your mate or friend pisses them off, it could suck for you. If you're a legionnaire, and your beloved breaks the law, could suck for you. If you're in Tenneshi and your mate messes up, Tenneshi could order you to do terrible things!
If you're a Mastershadow artist, any of the above get pissed off, and it sucks for you. Hell, depending on who your mate is (if they are an indie hunter) some indie hunter could get pissed off at your mate, and, wow, sucks for you.
If I'm going to be forced into murder and betrayal, I wanted it to not be by any random dude in the whole city, you know?
I guess that's when you have to make a choice. Do the job, or pack up the kids and run away to Red Storm. And it isn't against the rules to choose the latter, as far as I know.
True, but, this system *does* have some wiggle room. There's nothing saying a Templar couldn't gladly inform a victim they'd better take out a contract, and, since there's delay, discretely manage to have the option for the goof ball trying to murder someone for some trivial matter disappear first. Or purposefully hire a failed and incompetent artist, setting them up to fail. And so on.
They *technically* did their job, after all.
A few suggestions, thoughts, concerns, and commentaries.
One.
Would it be possible to create a board somewhere, in some ritual place. That board will be flagged as unreadable by everyone, except the templarate. But it would be possible to post there by 'anyone'. The first thing a person does to set up the contract is going to that board and posting in it something simple. "<Insert title> Amos seeks the Templarate's help, in order to hire a shadowrunner ... I mean, shadow artist, for a job on <insert victim's name here>. There might be some default phrases, or it can be detailed, doesn't matter.
The reasoning for this is simple. This board will be read by 'all' templars. And if the templar chooses to 'lose' the paperwork. His rival templars will snitch him/her out in a heart beat. Add some massive punishment to a Templar who got found out to be cheating the system, and we're good to go.
Two.
Would it be possible to create some kind of a ritualized conversation that happens between a Templar and the Shadowrunner (Come on, Nyr. Admiiiit it ... you've been playing shadowrunner). Arghem. Anyway. A ritualized conversation that would briefly and vaguely describe the type of a job, certain caveats, and the danger level of the victim.
Templar: You are called upon a Task.
Shadow: I listen to the call.
Templar: The task of great cunning and stealth, no trace, no sight in your wake. (The job is a stealthy one. No playing on the public, no need to reveal yourself or be caught). The task is of great artistry, every move fluid, His city in awe of your performance (The job has showmanship elements. Possibilities/requirements of being revealed, etc). The task of great complexity, cunning and wisdom will be your guides. (It's up to the artist, how it will be done. The job is a hard one and not standard. Pay Hike)
Shadow: I hear the call.
Templar: The hunt is for the vestric/tandu/duskhorn/raptor/gwoshi/kryl/bahamet (The difficulty of the victim. It's very vague and really depends on the judgement of the templar.)
Shadow: I hear the call.
Templar: The hunt elusive, but sometimes seen in early days/late days. (This is iffy, but basically ... the victim plays early in the day/ middle of the day/late in the day? I dont like it myself ,but there MUST be SOMETHING like that in consideration somehow. Sometimes people simply can NOT meet another person due to IRL time belts difference).
Shadow: I heard the call and I am ready.
At any point until the Shadow Runner says he is ready, he can refuse the contract. There might be some ritual phrase like "I see another prey and I am drawn to it". Or whatever really. The point is, the shadow runner refuses the task without hearing any details. A shadow runner may for example prefer stealth work, or prefer loud work, or he hears the word 'kryl/bahamet', and realizes the Templar's trying to freaking kill him.
This 'could' affect the speed with which a shadowrunner can progress from rank to rank. But 'not' overly so, because ... sometimes it's just something a person is not great at and the Templar who approached him failed to see this. Obviously, normally the Templars should be wiser and pick the shadowrunners with appropriate skills. But sometimes, they will not have that much of a selection.
I also think that it should be possible for a shadow artist to refuse the contract even after hearing the job, but with massive punishments. And not in terms of coin either, but something like ... a year's exile. Or an indefinite exile until he performs an act of great valour in an enemy city. Or perhaps the punishment of BOREDOM, where he is to go to the territory that requires watch and spends a year there, reporting in. Which I guess could be linked to exile. Basically something that seriously benefits Tuluk, and prevents the artist from refusing it willy nilly. Fines will not do it. Slicing off arms and tongues would be wasteful. If it was possible to do something like for example, block the artist's ability to use the way until his exile is over, it would also be kinda cool.
It might also be possible to make the rejection ability vary by the rank. An apprentice can refuse a contract during the rituyal. A Journeyman can refuse the contract during and after details are given out. Master can not refuse a contract 'period'. But the Templar suffers massive punishments should he/she get a Master artist killed by giving him a job that's obviously unsuited to him/her. Wasting City Resources, that is!
Some Scenarios.
Training backstab can be very awkward sometimes. Especially for Celves who dont leave the city. Before, Akai Sjir, or whomever could explore Undertuluk and 'defend' themselves, or whatever. Now, it's different. Would it potentially be possible for a patron to make a 'broad' contract for his partisan? Like say ... A patron wishes to create some sense of danger in the warrens, making their populace choose to cling and respect the legionnaires more. So he hires his partisan through the Templarate, to simulate that danger. This may involve ... a lot of murders, actually.
Some assassinations. (90% of them in my case), are done by more then one person. Sometimes people dont know I exist and they're helping me kill the dude, sometimes they're following my instructions. I find that type of killing to be very fun, since it involves a great many people in little or large ways. Even if it's as simple as hiring a whore to lure a dude into an apartment.
But your type of 'no talking about a contract' kind of prevents this, doesnt it? Every artist seems to require to be a loner, since these things should not be talked about. And if you impliment a system where a shadow runner who gets the job, goes right back to the Templar to hire a 'whore' shadow runner, and 'flasher' shadow runner, and 'pickpocket' shadow runner. Suddenly, something that a group of 3-4 vagrants could scheme, discuss, and carry out in a single day evening, turns into a 7 day ordeal, where the Templar is seeking all these people out.
Quote from: HavokBlue on September 26, 2013, 07:14:02 PM
My point applies to things beyond assassination though. If I want to hire a shadow artist to steal Talia's diamond necklace, how do I negotiate for a better artist if I don't know what artist I'm hiring? If I pay the Templar 3000 coins, what guarantee do I have that he isn't going to go set Amos the Day One Burglar on the job? If I'm a 30-Days-Played Burglar and I'm getting contracted to steal things for 200 coins, how do I know the Templar isn't pocketing another 2800? What is my motivation to operate within the system if I'm proficient enough to operate outside it without being caught AND with the power to negotiate my own fees?
Then the Templar is an idiot and I'm sure he will be dealt with eventually by his superiors.
1.
QuoteSimilarly, the templarate is brokering the contract to the artist, and will not punish an artist for fulfilling a contract as given. If a contract does call for more unusual practices, the templar providing the contract will go over it carefully with the artist to be sure they understand how it works. There is art to be found in any number of practices.
Templar to dwarven Shadow Artist: The contract as it is stated requires that you engage sexually, dwarf, with this half elf, while wearing a conical hat and a fake mustache, for political reasons, and only then once you've done this twice, and after the second act of sexual congress, you must sing The Wisdom of Trees by Methyas Groot before enacting the kill armed only with forks. Mind you, this is to be done precisely in this manner, to make the most appropriate statement possible. You cannot say no, dwarf. In return you get four hundred coins now and another four hundred on completion of the job.2.
QuoteArtists are only granted the highest rank (master) with proven skill and evidenced dedication to the city-state of Tuluk. Artists of that rank are loyal to the city-state of Tuluk, and must be prepared to either sever ties with their patron...or to begin taking contracts against their patron. Patrons often dismiss partisans that achieve this rank precisely because their loyalty is no longer to the patron.
Who determines the changes in rank? Is racial bias a method of hampering progress, as it should be? Is there potential for bribing one's way into a higher status of artistry? With a name like "Shadow Artist" does this preclude spies, informants, and non thief/burglar/assassin style workers of the system? Why would a Surif wish to invest their time and energy into fostering a relationship with a potential Shadow Artist if they will only have such loyalty and service rewarded with a blank-eyed automaton who has no ability to back out of deals against their friends, employers and loved ones?
3. With the social status chart being a more of a guideline than a living, breathing document to actually play off of and adhere to, will the onus be on the player of the Templar involved to be 100% certain of the social caste position for the individuals involved, or will there be some grandiose method of allowing the playerbase to be absolutely sure where they are in the social pecking order, so they cannot under any circumstances pull off a contract without help?
4. How will non-citizen GMH employees be handled when it comes to being subject to a contract, does their status automatically reflect the relative position of one of their northern peers, or are they considered non-citizens who can be contracted against at any time?
5. Will all contracts in this regard be restricted to Gol Krathu, or will contracts that take the artist abroad, not necessarily as far as Allanak, be forbidden?
6. If this system is going to be reliant on status and power brokers willing to take the chances, isn't it perhaps time to open up the Surif on a much broader level than is currently being seen in Tuluk?
7. Will the templarate pcs have a recommended chart for rates or will it totally be at the discretion of the parties involved how much coin changes hands?
8. Is the barter system allowed or is it all coin for contract?
9. So the Shadow Artist can be known socially as a master burglar, who cannot talk to anyone about their jobs, and if they choose to, can show off their display of inks as a method of affirming their status and caste? I this subtle?
10 With the Shadow Artists being sub-contractors for the City-State, will there be an established "artists union" being put in place to guide new players as well as veterans learning the system?
Just a couple questions while I consider eating dinner.
To those saying PC templars who buck this system will get dealt with by their superiors, I think that goes back to putting them in straightjackets. "This is what the docs say, this is how it is, and this is what you must do", says Muk (aka the staff).
In Allanak, everybody knows blue robes are corrupt as all hell and half are only paying lip service to Tek, and Tek doesn't care. Tek is so far above blue robes that he cares what they're doing about as much as we care about what the colony of ants in our back yard is up to. Muk should be the same way in Tuluk. Muk is a god-king and sees years pass by the way mortal people see days. He has way, way, way better things to do than crack down on low level templars who aren't upholding their duties to the sacred shadow artist rituals. The same can be said for black robes and red robes and the Tuluki equivalents on down to the level of PC templars, who are so unimportant to the power structure in the templarate that THEY are the ones getting stuck actually dealing with the common folks.
'nakki blue robes generally don't have much proscribed to them in terms of how they must deal with day-to-day things. What they do have is some hard-and-fast rules (kill any threats to the city such as defilers), and then wide latitude to do anything else they can get away with. I think that lack of rules works well to foster corruption, oppression, and brutality, and I'd like to see it in Tuluk too.
If on the other hand we say Tuluk's templars will be smacked down if they don't do things like this in very certain ways, even if that conflicts with their personal interests, we're cutting off ways for them to be corrupt and disloyal and generally Zalanthan. I think we all WANT them to be able to be corrupt bastards if they want to be. I sure do. But systems like this seem too rigid to allow that.
Quote from: HavokBlue on September 26, 2013, 07:14:02 PM
What is my motivation to operate within the system if I'm proficient enough to operate outside it without being caught AND with the power to negotiate my own fees?
You know there is a reason no real crime in Tuluk unlike allanak, and i think the reason for that is not only because Tuluk has no place like the rinth. Anyways what will probably motivate your character to choose to operate within the system is probably similar to those reasons. I think Lauramars said it best though:
Quote from: LauraMars on September 26, 2013, 04:53:26 PM
Quote from: Jherlen on September 26, 2013, 04:32:46 PM
One final thought: what happens to criminals who want to work outside the bounds of this system? What happens to people who work with/hire them?
THE SAME THING THAT HAPPENS TO EVERYONE ELSE
(http://30.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_kslr9xtbTA1qziyd9o1_500.png)
Maybe. Its how its felt to me once in a while. There are still a lot of things changing so who knows.
In Allanak, entire societies are capable of thriving without ever needing to interact with a templar. Tuluk is different. They're two different cities. For this licensed thing to work, there has to be faith in that system. In the third doc about taking the contract out, it states "You have faith in the system" ... well, in Allanak, nobody has any faith in any system. There are no systems. They are two different cities.
I still want to know what happens when there's only one PC Shadow Artist in the city and someone takes out a contract to kill them.
Is that when they find out the Sun King has a time machine?
(http://jrforasteros.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Looper-Kill-Zone.jpg)
So that's what happened to people who got Lirathowned...
I'm glad I'm not the only one whose getting Shadowrunner and Looper vibes from this. Makes for good reading.
How about if instead of a contract system it was more of a bounty system?
1. Noble wants commoner Amos dead.
2. He goes to Templar, tosses some heavy pouches of coin and gives him the instructions.
3. Noble>commoner. Therefore Templar sanctions it and receives coins for his trouble.
4. Templar places the instructions on a special IC board only shadow artists would have access.
5. Templar also states the bounty: coins, jewels, steel sword. Whatever the noble have given the Templar to sweeten the deal.
6. Shadow artists check the board regularly if they see a generous bounty and think they can handle the job, they contact Templar and take it.
7. Shadow artist performs the job, and Templar decides how well and pays the artist the bounty accordingly.
8. The Templar will decide if the bounty has been carried out and thus complete or if the job should remain available for other artists to attempt
9. This finally decision will probably be dictated by how well the Templar was paid himself for the trouble.
10. The bounty will remain on the board for up to an IC year. At which point noble would have to reconsider the bounty, either withdrawing it or paying the Templar again to put it up again.
Alright so this system allows shadow artists to choose whether or not to take jobs. While the bounty is important, the harder the job the more prestige. A good hit and performance might still warrant a bonus from the contractor. Shadow artists would be sworn to secrecy on the contents of the board, violating that rules could mean disappearing. However, it wouldn't be uncommon for the victim to somehow still find out there was a hit on them. At which point they might decide to pack up and run to Luirs or Redstorm for an IC year or two until it blows over. That kinda sends a nice message too. The system also covers for the fact there might be no shadow artists capable of attempting the hit unlike the contract system.
The victim now having the potential to know that someone is going to try to kill them does makes things a lot harder for a shadow artist. Thus I feel they would need a bit more leeway in order to perform their duties. There for there should be more emphasis for performance and effectiveness rather then just discretion. Also since legionnaire are roughly excepted from harm by a shadow artist, perhaps good artists would they would have a working relationship with soldiers. I don't think legionnaires should be allowed to be shadow artists themselves but I can see them being paid to look the other way or move crowds along as someone attempts to assassinate someone in a tavern in the middle of the day. The citizen themselves maybe even giving the artist an applause if they are able to kill their target efficiently without making a ruckus ( and initiating crime code). Equally though some victims might pay legionnaires to help them out instead so there is room for a lot of treachery. Also knowing or hiring shadow artist once again becomes profitable.
I have a few thoughts after reading through the docs. I found myself agreeing with Jherlen quite a bit while perusing the responses. I think having specific documents on the shadow arts in Tuluk is wonderful and will go a long way to improving the role play in and around Tuluk. Thank you guys (imms) for putting so much time and energy into these!
I'm having some trouble with the rigidity. Along with many of you, I agree that the 'no refusal' clause is difficult to swallow. Random example; Say you are a shadow artist in Tuluk, a patron (or employer) has taken you in, fed/clothed/trained you up. Now you are 'in the system' and a Templar calls you up to mess with someone else that your Patron/employer is involved with (or is friends with, political allies etc). You can't refuse, you can't talk to your Patron about it. Your only option is to go in and actively work against your Patron's best interests. I get that this game is 'murder, corruption, betrayal' but usually you have some choice in *who* you are actively betraying, and for what interests you are doing the betraying.
Why would a patron/employer take on the cost and effort of training up a shadow artist, who could then easily be used in a contract against them? I get the 'so that you can use them yourself' answer...but why put in the effort and time and energy if they can just as easily be used against you (maybe not against you personally, but could easily be used against your best interests). Why build up a tool that can be used by others to tear yourself down? I have a hard time seeing patrons and employers going through the trouble and expense. Is it that the only people that would really benefit from spending the time and energy to help train up a shadow artist would be the templarate?
Am I understanding correctly that almost all thievery/burglery would have to be contract driven and done through the templarate? So random muggings or pick pocketing would be basically nonexistent in Tuluk? I guess I'm having a hard time wrapping my brain around this concept. So nobody in the Warrens who is a poor little thief ever steals just because they are hungry or because they are poor?
Some of my immediate thoughts and questions. Overall, I'm glad to see some specific docs about sneakity type play in Tuluk. I think in general people will be much more inclined to play these roles if specific guidelines are mapped out for them. Sneakity type stuff does happen in Tuluk, they just like to be neat and tidy about it all.
Blur, your system would work in a city like Allanak, not in Tuluk, where secrecy is often more valuable than bronze.
With a system like yours, everyone and their cousins would end up knowing who has a bounty on their head, both in an IC and OOC manner.
Quote from: Irulan on September 26, 2013, 11:07:09 PM
Am I understanding correctly that almost all thievery/burglery would have to be contract driven and done through the templarate? So random muggings or pick pocketing would be basically nonexistent in Tuluk? I guess I'm having a hard time wrapping my brain around this concept. So nobody in the Warrens who is a poor little thief ever steals just because they are hungry or because they are poor?
I don't really understand that part either.. It seems to me that a pickpocket would have been doing that from his early ages, picking pockets from wealthy traders and warren folks alike. I seriously doubt that anyone would suddenly find themselves at 16 and decide that for a living they want to be a shadow artist focusing on pickpocketing only.
Unless I misread and it means more like, "If you get caught unlicensed as a pickpocket, prepare to pay a heft fee/spend some time in jail", as opposed to getting caught pickpocketing while licensed.
But even THEN, a licensed shadow artist who ONLY pickpockets when a contract is given to him would quickly lose the "art" gained if he never practices his theft on random passerbys, stealing small amount of coins here and there.
I've played random joke merchants in Tuluk who were never bards/seekers/respected members of society. I was probably better at various ... performances then some bards at the time, but I still did not have the influence and respect that they did. Only difference? I'm just a dude who sings ditties, and they are bards, parts of an organization and tradition of Tuluk. Same goes for shadow runners. You can steal crap to your hearts content, until you get caught and get your hands cut off. Or ... you can be a shadow artist. I wonder how many shadow artists became so, 'after' getting caught and put to "the choice".
Quote from: Dar on September 26, 2013, 11:31:42 PM
I've played random joke merchants in Tuluk who were never bards/seekers/respected members of society. I was probably better at various ... performances then some bards at the time, but I still did not have the influence and respect that they did. Only difference? I'm just a dude who sings ditties, and they are bards, parts of an organization and tradition of Tuluk. Same goes for shadow runners. You can steal crap to your hearts content, until you get caught and get your hands cut off. Or ... you can be a shadow artist. I wonder how many shadow artists became so, 'after' getting caught and put to "the choice".
Then I would think that Tuluk would have thousands of so-called shadow artists, considering that most, if not all elves have done some pickpocketing at some point or another in their life.
I would also think that at least 1/4 of them would have been caught at some point for petty theft, and seriously doubt that they all have their hands cut off or given a choice they can't refuse.
I'd debate, but the point of the thread is to improve the concept of legalized crime in Tuluk. So I wont argue.
Quote from: Dar on September 26, 2013, 11:38:14 PM
I'd debate, but the point of the thread is to improve the concept of legalized crime in Tuluk. So I wont argue.
Fair enough, I'm mostly confused about the whole thing so I'll step away and wait till there's more information about it all :)
Bah. If you're a wannabe "shadow artist" and you want to get licensed, you're a nobody and it can be annoying to set up that meeting with the templarate. Getting yourself arrested is basically the best way to do it.
Crime in Tuluk has always been licensed, so I'm not sure what the confusion is about. This is only a model that gives us clear cut lines on who you can take a license on, and creates accountability for the Templars who dish those out.
Gone are the days of Joe Commoner, a salt-grebbing nobody, cotton-picking your way to ordering a hit on that partisan Seeker because they made a quip about your dull wit in the Sanctuary, and it goes through because the Templar who did your license is enemies with said Seeker's patron.
This is an improvement on the old system.
And you're worried about getting a contract against your PC's friend/sibling/lover? I hate to ruin your Care Bear fantasy, but that's the kind of conflict on which this game thrives. Don't play with fire if you don't want to get burned.
I do think there should be more oversight on what artist is selected to do the job. A Templar sabotaging a contract, for instance, would be making a mockery of Tuluki culture by creating an opportunity for failure and risking a "public scene". Punishment for such an act should range from being shamed and labeled incompetent, and after repeat offenses, being relieved of their duties as a broker (and therefore taking a hit to a viable source of income). To make this easier, if an artist fails? The Templar fails.
Quote from: OnlyChicken on September 27, 2013, 12:06:03 AM
Crime in Tuluk has always been licensed, so I'm not sure what the confusion is about. This is only a model that gives us clear cut lines on who you can take a license on, and creates accountability for the Templars who dish those out.
Crime has always been licensed, but it has not always been *contracted*. The new docs specifically say that all thievery is to be done under contract or not at all. Under the current system thieves are licensed, but that is it. They aren't really followed, and basically it just means if they end up getting caught thieving, then they will get less of a penalty than if they weren't licensed. Getting contracted to perform said thievery is a different thing. I'm not saying it is a bad change, it is just a change that is a little bit confusing to me. I feel like it is a little be unrealistic that zero stealing or burglarizing would take place without a contract, especially to those that are poor or starving. I wouldn't mind if that part of the docs was a little bit more explicit.
Then perhaps I misunderstood this, as well. In the current system, you buy a license for assassination, and it's a one and done. It is more or less a contract killing. For thievery, yes, it is an umbrella license that makes you a state sponsored thief. Now, you must acquire a contract for each individual theft, correct?
But that doesn't change much. The poor and elven will continue to steal, and they will do their damnedest not to get caught. It would be culturally instilled in them to not be overt or do something that would risk getting caught, right?
But there's a core difference here. This is petty theft. The other is contracted theft. You might see them as analogous to the person stealing a Snickers from the corner store and that jewel thief who breaks into a museum to nab that rare diamond.
I went back and read the FAQ again, and I think I misunderstood it the first time. It wasn't really saying that nobody would ever commit thievery, it was just saying that it would be illegal to do so and would incur more penalties if caught. I'm cleared up a little bit.
Quote from: OnlyChicken on September 27, 2013, 12:06:03 AM
And you're worried about getting a contract against your PC's friend/sibling/lover? I hate to ruin your Care Bear fantasy, but that's the kind of conflict on which this game thrives. Don't play with fire if you don't want to get burned.
The only character I can see being willing to carry out a job against a lover/friend/family member is a total sociopath. It's great if people want to play one, but that probably shouldn't be the only type of shadow artist that's workable. It'd be really cliche if every shadow artist ends up being That Guy -- you know, the dark, solitary, brooding, dangerous-glance-emoting "I'm not an assassin but I'm toooooootally an assassin" dude who sits in taverns not talking at all while he drinks his ale ominously, then stands up and raises the hood on his skull-embroidered greatcloak and slips off into the night.
You should be able to be a shadow artist, have some friends, have a life in the city, without being That Guy.
By the way, OnlyChicken, you could ditch the hyperbole a bit and post on your normal account. It wouldn't kill you.
Perhaps institute a "I know this man" type rule, where a Shadow Artist may refuse a contract, but must also keep any information to themselves, and not try to interfere when the contract goes to another?
Well, for one, I thought that being recognized as a Master Assassin would be something of pride, akin to being known as a great Bard.. And that people would recognize you as such and show you the respect that comes with it.
And why wouldn't someone want to be friends or lovers with a Master Assassin? That person stands the same chance of being assassinated whether they are mated with that assassin or not.
So as much as I understand the assassin being reluctant to take a contract to kill his sweetheart, I really don't see why someone would not want to be in a relationship with a recognized artist.
Again, that person stands as much chance to be assassinated in the end whether she is mated with an assassin or not, the only difference is that she shares the honor of her mate's reputation.
That person is not a murderous freak, that person is a known and celebrated contracted "artist", working to free His Awesome City of all evil-doers within.
Quote from: Malken on September 27, 2013, 12:49:49 AM
Well, for one, I thought that being recognized as a Master Assassin would be something of pride, akin to being known as a great Bard.. And that people would recognize you as such and show you the respect that comes with it.
And why wouldn't someone want to be friends or lovers with a Master Assassin? That person stands the same chance of being assassinated whether they are mated with that assassin or not.
So as much as I understand the assassin being reluctant to take a contract to kill his sweetheart, I really don't see why someone would not want to be in a relationship with a recognized artist.
Again, that person stands as much chance to be assassinated in the end whether she is mated with an assassin or not, the only difference is that she shares the honor of her mate's reputation.
That person is not a murderous freak, that person is a known and celebrated contracted "artist", working to free His Awesome City of all evil-doers within.
It might also depend on how many capable assassin shadow artist PCs are active.
The question isn't so much why anyone else would want to have relations with a Master Assassin, Malken -- you make some great points -- the question is why such a person themself would want to place their art or trade above their loved ones. Some people might, but some might not - by not allowing any avenue of refusal, the system as proposed pretty much ensures that anyone not fully devoted to Tuluk above all else and the artistry of their trade probably wouldn't be a shadow artist. And the people that -are- fanatical devotees, well, they probably have their niche in Tuluk just fine.
I share a lot of the excitement and concerns already mentioned in this thread, and I have others as well.
THE LIKESDocumentation and Clarification!Quote from: Molten Heart on September 26, 2013, 03:27:44 PM
IIRC this system is basically the same as the old (except with the double blind method of hiring artists which was always an option but now always the case), and it's documented much better.
Independent of the specifics of the system, I think that having public documentation about the contracting system for sneaks will encourage more use by the playerbase. Previously I think most players were uncertain of how it was supposed to work, and what would or wouldn't land them in hot water, but now having clear public documentation should lead to much more use.
Social status means something!Quote from: Blur on September 26, 2013, 03:12:49 PM
I really like that there is more emphasis on caste and social status now.
Quote from: janeshephard on September 26, 2013, 05:03:42 PM
BTW, I think the social status thing is very good. If it was more fleshed out and official in the docs it would give people motivation to rise up in the ranks of GMHs and Noble Houses.
Totally agreed. The social status system of Tuluk is one of my favorite parts of the northern culture and with these changes then social status will actually affect behavior. I'm thrilled!
THE DISLIKESAll 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.
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.
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.
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?
PC to PC roleplay has little role in policing the system.Quote from: Kryos on September 26, 2013, 07:23:16 PM
Quote from: LauraMars on September 26, 2013, 07:19:04 PMThis post
Even Templars have clear and superior masters: their higher ranking templars and ultimately, the Sun King. And if Old Boy Muk says, "this is how it is" any Templar who disagrees is going to disappear themselves. Or, they can try and find wiggle room and risk being vanished for their decision. They too, get to suffer. So great!
Quote from: Malken on September 26, 2013, 07:32:49 PM
Quote from: HavokBlue on September 26, 2013, 07:14:02 PM
My point applies to things beyond assassination though. If I want to hire a shadow artist to steal Talia's diamond necklace, how do I negotiate for a better artist if I don't know what artist I'm hiring? If I pay the Templar 3000 coins, what guarantee do I have that he isn't going to go set Amos the Day One Burglar on the job? If I'm a 30-Days-Played Burglar and I'm getting contracted to steal things for 200 coins, how do I know the Templar isn't pocketing another 2800? What is my motivation to operate within the system if I'm proficient enough to operate outside it without being caught AND with the power to negotiate my own fees?
Then the Templar is an idiot and I'm sure he will be dealt with eventually by his superiors.
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.
Whew, I'm tired and it's late so I'll have to share my additional questions and suggestions later.
P.S. Still stoked about the concept of Tuluki Kanly (http://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,46260.msg778692.html#msg778692).
edit: one "hire" changed to "contract" for clarity
I'd be more interested to see the non-lethal "message sending" situations. Its not very "Tuluki" to mug someone, or to beat them down in the street because they spat near a Winrothol or whatever. Tuluk is very about snide comments, and things happening out of the way.
Which is why, I thought, the "Assassination Contracts" were the only thing you could do in Tuluk. Otherwise, it was Bard's territory. I mean, who would deface someone's home? Not a true Tuluki, for sure, that'd be too obvious! They'd add something in, that didn't match the decor, and snicker the next time they were at the bar.
Quote from: Molten Heart on September 27, 2013, 12:54:35 AM
It might also depend on how many capable assassin shadow artist PCs are active.
But then you would just be dismissing the hundred of other virtual shadow artists that might be working in the city, even if there's only 1 active shadow artist PC present.
and Jherlen, I totally understand your point and agree with it, I was mostly making a point to those who said that if the shadow artist couldn't refuse a contract, then no one in their right mind would want any friendship/relationship with them :)
Quote from: Jherlen on September 27, 2013, 12:38:37 AM
By the way, OnlyChicken, you could ditch the hyperbole a bit and post on your normal account. It wouldn't kill you.
Who is using hyperbole here? Your "That Guy" rant takes the cake.
Anyway ...
At the very minimum, you have that classic killer-with-a-conscious scene that ends in "Run. Leave the city, and don't ever come back. I SAID GO!! *cue emotional soundtrack*"
I would take a scenario where a player is forced to be creative in resolving a conflict over the "white picket fences, two kids and a tregil" scenario any day of the week. That's me. That might not be your cup of tea, but you don't have to play a Shadow Artist, though, do you?
Furthermore, doesn't rejecting a contract compromise the solvency of the system? Now, you can go and warn your friend. They slip the next assassin, and the system fails. Your reputation is ruined, and you're likely the new guest of honor at a half-giant hackfest.
And maybe, just maybe, there are assassins who do make attachments, but value their loyalty to country over their loyalty to personal attachments. A belief in a higher cause. You don't have to be that lone wolf badass cliche to make that work. You don't even have to be a sociopath. I would even suggest the roleplay of dealing with your grief of having to perform such an act could be quite an experience.
How many mafia movies have you seen where some soldier has to off one of his pals? Actually, how many mafia movies have you seen where that
doesn't happen?
And no, I won't post on my normal account. It certainly won't kill me. I certainly don't have to.
Quote from: Malken on September 27, 2013, 01:02:34 AM
Quote from: Molten Heart on September 27, 2013, 12:54:35 AM
It might also depend on how many capable assassin shadow artist PCs are active.
But then you would just be dismissing the hundred of other virtual shadow artists that might be working in the city, even if there's only 1 active shadow artist PC present.
Of course there are many virtual people in the game, but they don't really effect other players directly (at least not regularly). If there's only one active shadow artist PC that's an assassin and someone takes out a contract on their lover, who's the assassin for the contract going to be? I'm sure staff could, if the templarate didn't want to approach this PC assassin, create some npc to do the job, but this seems problematic.
The hyperbole is in somehow asserting that anyone who sees a problem with this somehow is a Care Bear who wants nice happy endings for their character, and the tregil too. Nobody is arguing from that angle; what people are saying is the system is too rigid; from the artists' perspective, from the templars' perspective, and from the contracting agent's perspective. It sounds great on paper. I have serious doubts if it's flexible to hold up well when faced with the diversity of characters and situations the actual game is going to throw at it. That flexibility is a must in a roleplaying game. The roles this system seems to encourage are already very viable in Tuluk if that's your bag, and it presents a well-documented system for them, but just them. It really needs to have some fixes to make it broader and more workable for everyone involved.
Let's look at it like this, Jherlen ...
If your character cares so much about someone that they won't perform a contract kill on them, would they really just walk away from that meeting and never speak a word of it? No sane Templar is going to believe that. So, how do you fix it?
Now that I've fully read the docs, I have to say I like them largely as they are written. It makes sense that a criminal would have to give up much more than they currently do in Tuluk in exchange for state-sponsorship and protection. And it opens up room for real criminals to step in and fill in some gaps. Right now there is no downside to getting a license if you plan on breaking the law in Tuluk.
Maybe just add in a wrinkle to allow shadow artists to work for themselves on occasion for occasions when business is slow, or for a shadow artist whose skill set/skill level doesn't quite match any current contract. You could require the shadow artist to pre-clear small self-sustaining jobs with their templar handler, with the understanding that a small percentage of the profits belong to the government, and that would add in some IC flexibility while maintaining the new feel that the government really does own every contracted criminal in the city.
Krath, that would just suck to have you contracted to kill your own mate or lover or whatnot. Perhaps there should be something about registering who your lover or mate might be so that the Faithful don't choose you for those contracts.
Quote from: slvrmoontiger on September 27, 2013, 01:48:45 AM
Krath, that would just suck to have you contracted to kill your own mate or lover or whatnot. Perhaps there should be something about registering who your lover or mate might be so that the Faithful don't choose you for those contracts.
It would be interesting. It would be drama.
It's perfect, IMO.
Quote from: hyzhenhok on September 27, 2013, 01:49:50 AM
Quote from: slvrmoontiger on September 27, 2013, 01:48:45 AM
Krath, that would just suck to have you contracted to kill your own mate or lover or whatnot. Perhaps there should be something about registering who your lover or mate might be so that the Faithful don't choose you for those contracts.
It would be interesting. It would be drama.
It's perfect, IMO.
True it would be.
Crazy idea out of left field:
Move actual licensing to His Chosen. Keep registration with The Faithful.
Recruitment
The Shadow Agent approaches a noble and says "I'll work for you or your buddies." Or a noble finds promising individuals and offers to be their broker (and even helps get them registered).
Brokering
The noble then acts as a broker for those who hold some influence with him. Same rules apply on the caste system and targets. If these rules are broken and His Faithful find out a heavy fine is levied, qynars re-assigned etc. Don't do it unless you notify staff and are super careful.
License check:
If His Faithful catch a Shadow Agent in the act they check licensing, and excise the 'fine' themselves. If you're going to target Faithful Lord Amos' partisan the lovely Talia then you better not get your license checked, ever. Do the deed and move on.
Wrapping up
Talia has gone missing. It's been several weeks. The Chosen Lord has a private meeting with a Faithful Lord/Lady and mentions which contracts were fulfilled that month. He never discloses the names of who did what.
Promotion
A noble has to sponsor you for promotion. Only one promotion is allowed each year per broker. This ups the competition on doing your job well.
Problems solved
(1) No one is really safe.
(2) There's an obvious bias. Pick your broker. Play on that side of the field.
Problems created
* Nobles in Tuluk are severely under represented, and there aren't many who stick to the role for a long time. All it takes is one broker to store or take a hiatus to derail a lot of people's aspirations. The way to solve this is to tie brokerage to each House, so any noble of that House can act as a broker to the same pool of shadow agents.
* GMHs will need to ally themselves with a Chosen Lord to dip into his pool of licensed assassins.
Exemption
His Legion, His Faithful and His Chosen are all immune. They shouldn't be killing each other anyway. There's a war on!
It's a very Tuluki solution I think.
Thoughts?
Quote from: OnlyChicken on September 27, 2013, 01:29:29 AM
Let's look at it like this, Jherlen ...
If your character cares so much about someone that they won't perform a contract kill on them, would they really just walk away from that meeting and never speak a word of it? No sane Templar is going to believe that. So, how do you fix it?
Smoke trailing from the end of her tube of spice, the ice-cold-eyed Lirathan templar asks, in sirihish:
"I need ya to snuff a moll. Got herself a life, a family. She's a real piece of work. You might have heard of her, but it don't matter, see? So give her the ol pyramid shoes an toss her in the crater, see? You understand what I'm saying to you?"
Eyes glinting ominously in the shadows of his hood, you exclaim, in sirihish:
"His Will be done, Faithful Lady! I will fulfill the contract!"
(The tall and thick figure in the skull-embroidered hooded greatcloak's fingers tremble.)
You suffer from the use of the Way.
You think:
"Aw hell. It ain't worth it."
>w
>w
>w
>enter apartment
Bursting through the doors, ripping off his skull-embroidered hooded greatcloak and replacing it with a jaunty fedora, you shout, in sirihish:
"Sally! Pack your bags, we gotta split! Eunoli's girls is after ya, and they's hot on my tail!"
Stuffing garments and other possessions frantically, desperately into a large bag, you shout, in sirihish:
"Managed to buy us a little time by playin patsy, but we've gotta beat it! I've been tangling with the wrong crowd all along!"
The ice-cold-eyes Lirathan templar has arrived from the east, holding a loaded crossbow in one hand and a carefully rolled tube of spice in the other.
The ice-cold-eyes Lirathan templar smokes her carefully rolled tube of spice.
The ice-cold-eyes Lirathan templar looks down at you.
QuoteIf your character cares so much about someone that they won't perform a contract kill on them, would they really just walk away from that meeting and never speak a word of it? No sane Templar is going to believe that. So, how do you fix it?
How did we get in that situation to begin with? I'd say the templar done fucked up, he should have known to pick an artist that wasn't emotionally attached to the target. That's an IC mistake he can bear IC consequences for. Since the broker is a templar, he can of course kill the artist for refusing anyway if he really wants to keep the hit ultra-secret. But that shouldn't be the only avenue to go down. I can see times when disappearing a skillful shadow artist because he didn't want to take a contract would probably be worse than just risking the target might learn and be on their guard. Leaving it open to possibilities is way better than having a doc saying This Must Always Happen Exactly Just So.
Not to mention, a sane Templar shouldn't be believing that the norm is a shadow artist is going to be willing to betray his loved ones all for the sake of the abstract ideals of shadow artistry anyway. Some will be willing and some won't. I suspect many will take the "flee Tuluk and go live in Red Storm" route out of the situation. Maybe somebody should start up an express desert escort service.
But besides love, there are lots of other viable reasons I can see an artist wanting to refuse -- most of these will probably be far more common anyway.
- The contract is beyond their skill and they know it, and they don't want to risk failure or death.
- The contract is beneath their skill and isn't a challenge, and they don't want to waste their time
- The reward offered isn't worth the risk, or isn't enough to cover expenses
- They're too busy with other work
All of those reasons and more are part of a typical negotiation if you're trying to hire a criminal anywhere else, but in Tuluk, since the criminal has no power to refuse offers, they're at the helpless mercy of the broker arranging their deal. And that broker is a templar. And the templar will kill you if you refuse. So who are the only people who become shadow artists in Tuluk? People who have criminal skills but are anything but criminals, and are willing to use those skills any way they're told to by the templars. And who won't become shadow artists? Anyone who has criminal skills but would prefer to be the master of their own destiny and take jobs on their own terms. I suspect the latter group is larger than the former, especially since your typical criminal type probably has issues with following the rules/laws to begin with. Shadow artistry would seem to be more of a niche, when the docs apparently want it to be the norm. So how do you bring it back to the norm? Make the system less rigidly do-or-die for the artist. There have been lots of great suggestions on how to do that in this thread besides mine.
Quote from: Jherlen on September 27, 2013, 02:23:04 AM
Leaving it open to possibilities is way better than having a doc saying This Must Always Happen Exactly Just So.
What you're asking for is the ability to perform like an independent, unaffiliated contract killer with the full rights to negotiate contracts while simultaneously working within the system and retaining all of the privilege and status of that institution. You want your cake and you wanna eat it, too, as the saying goes. I can't blame you for that, but it doesn't make you right. An oppressive city-state run by a god-King dictator is an oppressive city-state; there is no democracy, or even illusion of choice.
And really, what is the point of this debate? It's likely to almost never arise, as a good Templar is going to keep tabs on their tools. In the bizarre and rare circumstance it does happen, it would make for interesting roleplay.
Also, I have to point out the lack of realism in denying such a contract in the first place. Put yourself in that character's boots. Imagine you're a killer. Your "broker" (we'll use that term, the actual term is, funny enough, an "agent") tells you they want you to kill a woman. They didn't do their research, obviously, because it turns out the target is your wife. Do you say "I can't do that, it's my wife!!" Do you turn that job for someone else to do? Or do you take it, and figure out how to deal with it?
Food for thought, I suppose.
Your other viable reasons don't make sense to me, at all. Why take a position like that if you don't want to do it? It seems the grudge in those cases is you don't want to work for the Templarate, you want to work for yourself. Again, you're desiring an indie killer role in a state-sponsored environment. If you wanna be
that guy, do it, but outside of the system.
Anyway, I've said my piece.
That'll do, pig.
Quote from: janeshephard on September 26, 2013, 06:12:13 PM
Quote from: Nyr on September 26, 2013, 06:06:21 PM
As for templars and neutrality...you are right. In general, templars have political bias. In this case, part of their job becomes brokering this system. That means making it work. It sounds as though you don't believe it or feel another group would handle it better. What exactly is the problem with the templarate running it if they run it by these guidelines?
Problems with Templars running it:
* It's time for a big battle. A northern born GMH Agent shows up and asks for a contract against a Noble's Sergeant (who also happens to be a fearsome warrior and a proven battle veteran). We're not talking internal politics anymore. Removing this Sergeant could hurt the tide of battle. This Sergeant kanked the Agent's mate and stole her.
* A Chosen Lord decides over the course of a month to pay heavily to have key employees removed from another Chosen Lord's House. The Templars are getting valuable information from these employees about southron plans.
I'd give you a third example, but I'm showing you ones that don't involve internal politics -- instead they relate to external threats. If contracts are never refused then a refusal would raise red flags (oh I wonder what that dude has that I don't?). Instead of an artist can refuse, the Templar can sit on the contract for a couple of weeks and then inform the buyer that a suitable artist can't be found for the job.
Of course this also means Templars won't put out contracts on friends and pets.
1. A) The templar sits on the contract- waiting until after the battle. B) The templar gives the contract to an artist, and lets them figure out that offing the Sergeant during the battle might be a convenient time. C) The templar DGAF about the sergeant and finds an artist.
2. A) The templar insinuates to the purchaser that, although legal, the contract would be inconvenient. B) The templar DGAF about anything and lets the contract go.
Basically- the PC templars can have a big effect, but they need to not dictate everything in the sandbox. This gives a bit of political manuevering to be done. What if you want a rival removed, who -happens- to be an important spy for Lady Templar Girla? You either push the contract through another templar who seals the contract until the deed is done, or find a way to make it worthwhile to the Lady Templar to push your contract through.
I just hopes this gives people something to do.
I've played in tuluk as a fairly well known assassin. Nobody wanted anyone dead, nobody even tasked him to spy on their rivals.
Quote from: Jingo on September 27, 2013, 03:43:34 AM
I just hopes this gives people something to do.
I've played in tuluk as a fairly well known assassin. Nobody wanted anyone dead, nobody even tasked him to spy on their rivals.
It will. Most people who roll Tuluk don't know this exists until they find out IC. Nyr is writing much clearer documentation on this.
I believe I have an angle which doesn't seem to have been covered much.
Characters:
We have:
Amos, Shadow Artist. The player of Amos puts in a solid couple of hours each night after the kids are in bed, and has been doing so for a long time now.
Malilk The Insulting Grebber. His mastery of invective has won him many exciting and powerful enemies. The player of Malik is a few time zones away, and pops on to play fairly briefly.
Talia, The Conscientious Templar. Talia's just been approved last week and is all new and shiny. Player of Talia is playing lots and lots.
Scene:
Talia had hardly been in game long enough to meet with her first Chosen before someone important in Kadius came up and requested to take out a contract on Malik. Talia's done some homework: Amos is by reputation the best shadow artist of his type among active PCs. She approaches Amos and tells him to kill Malik. Amos hasn't met Malik, but expects to meet him soon.
But he doesn't.
The player of Amos logs in and logs in and occasionally Amos meets someone who knows Malik who says he's often seen in such and such a place, or some other place, and he goes there, but Malik's never there. The player even resorts to staying up late some nights, to the detriment of marital harmony, but it so happens that on those nights, Malik's player is forced to work late and Malik isn't around either.
Time ticks by.
We're an IC year on, now, and Talia's getting frustrated. The Kadian has been quite discreet in asking why Malik's still around and saying things to his crafters that make them cry, but last time Talia ordered a new gemmed bangle, the price quoted made her wince. She hauls Amos in and quizzes him.
All Amos can do is make excuses.
Finally, Malik wanders off down the North Road to see who he can annoy in Luir's. He's got enough enemies now that he thinks he might try on a new name for a bit.
Talia asks Amos: is Malik dead yet?
Amos hasn't heard anything about Malik in some time, but really can't say for sure. If he does try his luck with a "yes", Malik's sure to be bored of Luir's and come home to torment the Salarri. If he says "no", his wait to meet the grebber is prolonged further, and Malik may well run into a carru next time he goes walkabout.
How do we stop this happening?
There needs to be some fashion of graceful failure which is accessible to a Shadow Artist in cases where the target logs on at the wrong times, goes off on holiday and doesn't log on for a bit, or goes out and gets killed by something. There should also be some kind of set time period so jobs don't drag on indefinitely.
I would suggest that Amos gets to return to Talia and say, "Faithful Lady, killing Malik is beyond my art. He evades me at every turn. I have failed to complete this contract." And then Amos must pay back the bounty, and perhaps a fine besides, and suffer the consequences to his reputation with Talia. Frustrating, certainly, when it's an OOC circumstance beyond Amos' control, but not character-destroying.
This also fixes the lovers case, and possibly the partisan case, without Amos ever getting the right of refusal. In the lovers case, if Amos is engaged to kill his lover, he will return much later and admit his failure. Talia isn't likely to engage Amos for the task, because the cost to money and reputation is unlikely to deter him. In the partisan case, a patron who has instilled sufficient loyalty in their partisan might still be safe; a templar would have to exercise great care in turning such a tool against its creator.
We can keep the "no right of refusal". We can keep the "master shadow artists may be asked to turn against their patrons". We just need to add something that we need anyway: a device to handle OOC inabilities to do the job.
We will however also need some means of escape for a templar asked to handle contracts for tasks where no suitable Shadow Artist exists, or the Shadow Artist who's perfect for the job accepts it and then goes out and gets eaten by a defiler.
On reflection, the templar case is the tricky one.
It's clear both templars and shadow artists need outs against the contract target who's seldom online, or has run to Red Storm, or dies of her own volition.
With the shadow artist, we get the pleasing bonus that these outs can also be employed to constitute an effective refusal of a job.
With the templar, it becomes an issue that these outs can be employed to constitute an effective refusal of a job; but the templar needs them even more, because the templar has also to deal with the situation where the target is perfect but the last reliable shadow artist vanished just after taking the job on, or the shadow artist botches it. Once the templar is able to admit failure of the contract, there are many things the templar can do to skew the result with no effective IC oversight, from deliberately putting work into inexperienced hands (and hey, new shadow artists have to learn too) to delaying the transmission to the artist to suggesting to their favourite partisan that sometimes people go to Red Storm for the sake of their health. More than that, some of these will be beyond OOC oversight: if Talia deliberately hires Amos, gambling on his hours not overlapping with Malik's, it can be passed off as an honest mistake.
I may have to ponder this for a bit.
What happens if there's a *templar* who wants someone's reputation smeared, or loot looted, or life taken - but the target hasn't broken any actual laws so there's no grounds for arrest? She can make something up, and avoid having to pay an Artist or even getting another party involved. Or, she could pretend there's a broker, and hire an Artist herself. Or, if that's not allowed, she could easily wait for someone else to get pissed off by the target, and broker the deal. Which she would find her absolute best person, charge the absolute least money to the person wanting the job done - and cover the balance to the best person out of her pocket with no one being the wiser.
Seems to me like the templar holds ALL the cards - not just most of them, or some of them. The templar can do the reverse, for the reverse scenario - a broker asks for the ruination of someone the templar wants to remain unsullied. So the templar charges an exhorbitant fee, contracts the absolute least competent person to do the job, pays that least competent person a fraction of what that person -should- get for it, knowing that the artist is likely to not even bother trying, and fail miserably.
Also, if you're the artist and you don't want to do the job, you could just take it, and not do it. And claim you tried but failed.
In addition, I feel there should be -minimum- pay for the different ranks of artist. An apprentice assassin should be worth no less than 400 - with the templar keeping 100 and the assassin getting the other 300. A journeyman - no less than 700 - with the templar keeping 200 and the journeyman keeping 500. Master artist should be able to name their own price, and the templar should be able to demand a minimum of a 10% fee, and a maximum of 50% of the fee.
A thief stealing an individual item from a target's person - maybe it'd work in reverse. Give the apprentice 500 sids to successfully steal an item - because if he does, it's not going to be very likely he'll be able to get a second item for his own profit, since he's still an apprentice and not all that competent. A journeyman could get 250 - and a "free pass" at a second item of his choice. A master thief could get 200, his choice of items plus the item needed by the guy contracting the job, and the continued high esteem of the templarate.
Or something to that effect.
In other words - there should be more of an incentive to WANT to be licensed, other than "it's required." Because what assassin in their right mind would volunteer to get a license to kill people, if he knows that at some point he might be required to kill his own family?
I'm not caught up with this whole thread yet. I like the idea of buyouts for assassins. I hate the idea of but outs for victims. Now there is a real disincentive to using the system. In stead of getting what you paid for you've now alerted someone. Now they can come back at you. Now they're alert that you're out to get them. (And really we can usually figure out who our enemies are. We can narrow the field at least) so the person who contracted is in a worse position than when they started.
And do you get your upfront fees back?
Years ago (2002? 04?) the guild would take money to kill someone then let them buy out of that contract. This always struck me as a crappy business practice. Sure you get paid twice for one job, but would ever want to use you a second time. After all you could have people not dead for free.
Quote from: HavokBlue on September 26, 2013, 06:47:51 PM
One more thing that comes to mind:
If the agent generally has no idea who the artist is, is the Templar in the deal responsible for negotiating the artists cost? Will there be a system in place to ensure that more reputable successful shadow artists are getting rewarded more for their work?
Yes to both.
Quote from: Jherlen on September 26, 2013, 06:58:46 PM
Since the system is double-blind, the broker has all the power in negotiating the cost and the artist. So depending who you're after and how the templar feels about it, you might get Nightshade Silentstrike the unparalleled assassin to do your contract for 200 sid (because he can't refuse anyway), or you might get charged 5000 sid for Amos the tall, muscular 0-day burglar. This is why it seems like the broker shouldn't be a political entity so that contracting agents can at least entertain an illusion of fairness and impartiality.
But again, that's an expectation that the templar is
going to do that...when the rules are such that they won't, at least not at this time.
Quote from: Taven on September 26, 2013, 07:00:57 PM
Okay, so they can't refuse having a pet killed, but what about killing the shit out of whoever hurt their pet? It seems like a big risk, because even if a templar is forced to sit back and watch someone useful to them die... Are there really going to be no repercussions for the person who contracted the hit? Even if you hire a templar other then the one who's favorite it was, that's no guarantee that the templar whose favorite just died wouldn't find out. They're templars with more means then the average Amos.
Yes, that does seem like a big risk. I imagine we could make it so that targeting a partisan of someone requires equal or greater social status of that patron, then?
Quote from: HavokBlue on September 26, 2013, 07:14:02 PM
My point applies to things beyond assassination though. If I want to hire a shadow artist to steal Talia's diamond necklace, how do I negotiate for a better artist if I don't know what artist I'm hiring? If I pay the Templar 3000 coins, what guarantee do I have that he isn't going to go set Amos the Day One Burglar on the job? If I'm a 30-Days-Played Burglar and I'm getting contracted to steal things for 200 coins, how do I know the Templar isn't pocketing another 2800? What is my motivation to operate within the system if I'm proficient enough to operate outside it without being caught AND with the power to negotiate my own fees?
On the templar side of things, we are working on docs for minimum standards. You would be surprised in a very "lol are you SERIOUS, those were the minimum standards before?"
Things that affect the price:
--difficulty of the task
--skill requirements (i.e., you need someone that can break and enter)
--special requests (you want the body found, you want something left arranged in a certain way, you expect some other strange thing)
Generally we'd like to see tasks meet a certain standard of payment, and some of that might be public...depending on the difficulty/special factors it raises from there.
Quote from: Taven on September 26, 2013, 07:15:19 PM
The reason that assassination is being focused on so much is that when killing people happens that things reach a level where the system might not work. I've got a lot of faith that the templars can broker other people's murders, but nobody likes to have to kill their own dudes. Unless you make some sort of rule like "Templars cannot look into assassinations of their own dudes if it was a contract, or terrible things happen to them", then that could work--if the citizens all also knew about it.
If it's handled well, this might be a good provision to add in, we'll need to look it over. You're right, the areas where it might not work need to be reviewed very carefully before implementation.
Quote from: Kryos on September 26, 2013, 07:18:16 PM
I hate to use one liners, so I'll expand, after, but "Welcome to Armageddon."
If you're a registered artist, the reality of your life is that anyone you might hold dear may one day be under your knife. And that feels particularly right for this game, doesn't it?
And on the other side of things, this is exactly what we had in mind when considering this system. If you are going to become a registered artist to kill people that other people want dead...you'd best be careful with who you befriend or make relationships with, lest you end up having to kill them. Unless you're the kind of sociopath that wants to do that...in which case, have at it.
Quote from: LauraMars on September 26, 2013, 07:19:04 PM
Anyway to switch topics slightly, let's be hypothetical some more and say the following happens:
There's 3 Shadow Artist pcs registered in the city - one of them happens to be an accomplished assassin, say a Journeyman Shadow Artist. The other two are thief and/or spy types who won't do wet work. For an unrelated reason, Chosen Lord Winrothol is furious with Journeyman Assassasin because her cover story is that she's the bard of his political rival and she wrote a mean song about him. He goes to his local templar and takes out a contract on her TO KILL HER because he's the laughingstock of the city now and is too dumb to know how to deal with it any other way.
What happens?
Does the templar, not being able to refuse a contract:
a) Tell one of the two thiefly types to kill the assassin, even though it's not their specialty
b) Arrest and disappear the assassin for being so politically clumsy
c) Inform Winrothol that shadow artists are immune to contracts (are they?) and blow Journeyman Assassin's cover
d) Comic fourth option ("For your final contract, you must KILL YOURSELF")
?
A: really couldn't send people that aren't "killers" to kill someone, that'd be a problem for the agent (expecting good work) and the templar (expecting to have work done properly) and the "non-killing artist" (expecting to do burglary things).
B: I don't follow this one, I don't think this would quite be the case, no.
C: Shadow artists aren't immune from contracts.
D: That would be hilarious if it was a contract worded poorly on the part of the Winrothol Lord. "You said you wanted to see his body decorating the floor before you; well, you didn't say it had to be dead." Pay the artist with the money from the dumb Chosen Lord.
This system relies on having active people registered that are interested in doing work in their field (as well as active players interested in using all sorts of artists to score political points). If there's no one that can do a job, it needs to wait until there is someone to do it.
I think some of you are making very wrong interpretations of what being a shadow artist means, and of what the templarate embodies and practices.
The amount of citizens of Tuluk numbers in the hundreds of thousands. The number of templars is somewhere between two hundred and three hundred. There is going to be multiple artists per templar. Outside any possible effects on being effective, a Templar has no reason to care about the wellbeing of their assets; they are replaceable and very much beneath even the greenest of templars.
Master shadow artists, perhaps, are the exception to this rule; you'd rather see them alive, I'm fairly sure. But then, consider what kind of a place Tuluk is. Tuluk is a city-state where the armed forces are lead by direct delegates of an immortal sorceror-king, fielding soldiers such as religiously fanatic elite slaves and immensely loyal legionnaires whose practices I cannot detail, but who are very much immensely loyal as well. Novice or journeyman shadow artists aside, if a master shadow assassin is not comparable in loyalty to a templar, fanatic or officer, they are not cut out to be the epitome of artistry. If, by the time you're a master shadow artist, you hold things in more value than the orders you receive, you aren't a good master shadow artist.
Also consider the whole situation of 'what if person X wants to off templar partisan Y.' Firstly, assassinations aren't your everyday occurence; I'm imagining they'd cost a whole lot more than things like rumors spread, people roughened up or items planted/stolen. Now consider that, though it may be secret that said partisan is a shadow artist, said person still is a templar's affiliate. The money to afford such an operation would be well above what any mere commoner would realistically be able to pay*, and no templar would choose a partisan commoner's wellbeing over that of such a rich person's. Secondly, consider that, since being a partisan is a supposedly prestigious job, a Templar should be able to find a dozen people to replace their now-lost pet and fund them well with the contract's money even if their affiliate ends up dead. Between commoners being far, far below templars, commoners being utterly and entirely displosable, and the amount of money and social class that such money requires to attain, contracts on templar pets being manufactured is nothing more than a passing nuisance.
I'm sorry, but I don't see this as any sort of good change.
It puts even more power into the hands of Templars (especially new Templars) of questionable integrity, and does not provide incentive to choose non-killing options in any way.
Plus there are the problems such as Quirk mentions in his post - problems like overlapping time zones or lack thereof.
Also the no refusal thing is the part where I said to myself, "Yep, never going to be a licensed shadow artist ever."
Quote from: LauraMars on September 26, 2013, 07:27:34 PM
I guess that's when you have to make a choice. Do the job, or pack up the kids and run away to Red Storm. And it isn't against the rules to choose the latter, as far as I know.
Yep, you could do either one of those.
Quote from: Dar on September 26, 2013, 07:32:22 PM
A few suggestions, thoughts, concerns, and commentaries.
One.
Would it be possible to create a board somewhere, in some ritual place. That board will be flagged as unreadable by everyone, except the templarate. But it would be possible to post there by 'anyone'. The first thing a person does to set up the contract is going to that board and posting in it something simple. "<Insert title> Amos seeks the Templarate's help, in order to hire a shadowrunner ... I mean, shadow artist, for a job on <insert victim's name here>. There might be some default phrases, or it can be detailed, doesn't matter.
The reasoning for this is simple. This board will be read by 'all' templars. And if the templar chooses to 'lose' the paperwork. His rival templars will snitch him/her out in a heart beat. Add some massive punishment to a Templar who got found out to be cheating the system, and we're good to go.
This is similar to what is in place now for templars. The templars do NOT cheat the system under this system, they must work through it and if they don't like it or there is some special case that deserves consideration, it must be brought before staff or the group of the templarate that is directly over this system.
Quote
Two.
Would it be possible to create some kind of a ritualized conversation that happens between a Templar and the Shadowrunner (Come on, Nyr. Admiiiit it ... you've been playing shadowrunner). Arghem. Anyway. A ritualized conversation that would briefly and vaguely describe the type of a job, certain caveats, and the danger level of the victim.
Templar: You are called upon a Task.
Shadow: I listen to the call.
Templar: The task of great cunning and stealth, no trace, no sight in your wake. (The job is a stealthy one. No playing on the public, no need to reveal yourself or be caught). The task is of great artistry, every move fluid, His city in awe of your performance (The job has showmanship elements. Possibilities/requirements of being revealed, etc). The task of great complexity, cunning and wisdom will be your guides. (It's up to the artist, how it will be done. The job is a hard one and not standard. Pay Hike)
Shadow: I hear the call.
Templar: The hunt is for the vestric/tandu/duskhorn/raptor/gwoshi/kryl/bahamet (The difficulty of the victim. It's very vague and really depends on the judgement of the templar.)
Shadow: I hear the call.
Templar: The hunt elusive, but sometimes seen in early days/late days. (This is iffy, but basically ... the victim plays early in the day/ middle of the day/late in the day? I dont like it myself ,but there MUST be SOMETHING like that in consideration somehow. Sometimes people simply can NOT meet another person due to IRL time belts difference).
Shadow: I heard the call and I am ready.
At any point until the Shadow Runner says he is ready, he can refuse the contract. There might be some ritual phrase like "I see another prey and I am drawn to it". Or whatever really. The point is, the shadow runner refuses the task without hearing any details. A shadow runner may for example prefer stealth work, or prefer loud work, or he hears the word 'kryl/bahamet', and realizes the Templar's trying to freaking kill him.
This 'could' affect the speed with which a shadowrunner can progress from rank to rank. But 'not' overly so, because ... sometimes it's just something a person is not great at and the Templar who approached him failed to see this. Obviously, normally the Templars should be wiser and pick the shadowrunners with appropriate skills. But sometimes, they will not have that much of a selection.
I also think that it should be possible for a shadow artist to refuse the contract even after hearing the job, but with massive punishments. And not in terms of coin either, but something like ... a year's exile. Or an indefinite exile until he performs an act of great valour in an enemy city. Or perhaps the punishment of BOREDOM, where he is to go to the territory that requires watch and spends a year there, reporting in. Which I guess could be linked to exile. Basically something that seriously benefits Tuluk, and prevents the artist from refusing it willy nilly. Fines will not do it. Slicing off arms and tongues would be wasteful. If it was possible to do something like for example, block the artist's ability to use the way until his exile is over, it would also be kinda cool.
It might also be possible to make the rejection ability vary by the rank. An apprentice can refuse a contract during the rituyal. A Journeyman can refuse the contract during and after details are given out. Master can not refuse a contract 'period'. But the Templar suffers massive punishments should he/she get a Master artist killed by giving him a job that's obviously unsuited to him/her. Wasting City Resources, that is!
...okay, this is definitely a neat idea. Fleshing out the culture of the artists sounds great. I worry a bit about the entirety of it being too complicated to follow even with documentation, but I like the idea of it and we will consider more along those lines.
Quote
Some Scenarios.
Training backstab can be very awkward sometimes. Especially for Celves who dont leave the city. Before, Akai Sjir, or whomever could explore Undertuluk and 'defend' themselves, or whatever. Now, it's different. Would it potentially be possible for a patron to make a 'broad' contract for his partisan? Like say ... A patron wishes to create some sense of danger in the warrens, making their populace choose to cling and respect the legionnaires more. So he hires his partisan through the Templarate, to simulate that danger. This may involve ... a lot of murders, actually.
Could be interesting...
QuoteSome assassinations. (90% of them in my case), are done by more then one person. Sometimes people dont know I exist and they're helping me kill the dude, sometimes they're following my instructions. I find that type of killing to be very fun, since it involves a great many people in little or large ways. Even if it's as simple as hiring a whore to lure a dude into an apartment.
But your type of 'no talking about a contract' kind of prevents this, doesnt it? Every artist seems to require to be a loner, since these things should not be talked about. And if you impliment a system where a shadow runner who gets the job, goes right back to the Templar to hire a 'whore' shadow runner, and 'flasher' shadow runner, and 'pickpocket' shadow runner. Suddenly, something that a group of 3-4 vagrants could scheme, discuss, and carry out in a single day evening, turns into a 7 day ordeal, where the Templar is seeking all these people out.
That's an interesting point to bring up, but I think we can make room in the system so that if an artist needs help, they can ask the templarate to sub out parts of it to other artists for assistance (and if assisting, well, they do have to talk to each other, no?).
Quote from: Law&Order on September 26, 2013, 07:34:32 PM
1. QuoteSimilarly, the templarate is brokering the contract to the artist, and will not punish an artist for fulfilling a contract as given. If a contract does call for more unusual practices, the templar providing the contract will go over it carefully with the artist to be sure they understand how it works. There is art to be found in any number of practices.
Templar to dwarven Shadow Artist: The contract as it is stated requires that you engage sexually, dwarf, with this half elf, while wearing a conical hat and a fake mustache, for political reasons, and only then once you've done this twice, and after the second act of sexual congress, you must sing The Wisdom of Trees by Methyas Groot before enacting the kill armed only with forks. Mind you, this is to be done precisely in this manner, to make the most appropriate statement possible. You cannot say no, dwarf. In return you get four hundred coins now and another four hundred on completion of the job.
QuoteBarring the absurd, a contract may stipulate any number of things.
2.
QuoteArtists are only granted the highest rank (master) with proven skill and evidenced dedication to the city-state of Tuluk. Artists of that rank are loyal to the city-state of Tuluk, and must be prepared to either sever ties with their patron...or to begin taking contracts against their patron. Patrons often dismiss partisans that achieve this rank precisely because their loyalty is no longer to the patron.
Who determines the changes in rank? Is racial bias a method of hampering progress, as it should be? Is there potential for bribing one's way into a higher status of artistry? With a name like "Shadow Artist" does this preclude spies, informants, and non thief/burglar/assassin style workers of the system? Why would a Surif wish to invest their time and energy into fostering a relationship with a potential Shadow Artist if they will only have such loyalty and service rewarded with a blank-eyed automaton who has no ability to back out of deals against their friends, employers and loved ones?[/quote]
In order:
Mentioned earlier, but templars, upon adequate quality of work/quantity of work proved. Yes, racial bias exists. No, you can't bribe your way into being a master artist. Spies/informants/etc
could be a part of the system but it doesn't mean they HAVE to be part of this; this is more for short-term projects, not long-term ones where infiltration/spying is needed. Because that shadow artist won't act against the Surif or the Surif's House while the Surif is over them for the apprentice and journeyman ranks. At Master rank, it's up to the Patron if they want to keep them around to have them for tasks; at that point it is generally inadvisable.
Quote3. With the social status chart being a more of a guideline than a living, breathing document to actually play off of and adhere to, will the onus be on the player of the Templar involved to be 100% certain of the social caste position for the individuals involved, or will there be some grandiose method of allowing the playerbase to be absolutely sure where they are in the social pecking order, so they cannot under any circumstances pull off a contract without help?
Why not both?
Quote4. How will non-citizen GMH employees be handled when it comes to being subject to a contract, does their status automatically reflect the relative position of one of their northern peers, or are they considered non-citizens who can be contracted against at any time?
If you do review the old chart, it handles that already.
Quote5. Will all contracts in this regard be restricted to Gol Krathu, or will contracts that take the artist abroad, not necessarily as far as Allanak, be forbidden?
Maybe.
Quote6. If this system is going to be reliant on status and power brokers willing to take the chances, isn't it perhaps time to open up the Surif on a much broader level than is currently being seen in Tuluk?
Frankly, we've been running full steam since an HRPT 2 months ago; we can't change everything overnight even if we do have plans. Yes. It would be nice to have another Surif noble, and we'll put up a call, but it might be a bit longer.
Quote7. Will the templarate pcs have a recommended chart for rates or will it totally be at the discretion of the parties involved how much coin changes hands?
Yes to the former.
Quote8. Is the barter system allowed or is it all coin for contract?
I don't see why it couldn't involve barter.
Quote9. So the Shadow Artist can be known socially as a master burglar, who cannot talk to anyone about their jobs, and if they choose to, can show off their display of inks as a method of affirming their status and caste? I this subtle?
Inks = yes. Subtle, I dunno. The old system was such that it allowed for "Master Thieves" and "Master Assassins" yet there was no determined tattooing, rank, or public status afforded to these individuals. It was a "soft rank" that will now be something noteworthy if noticed (or if it is something that needs to be noticed).
Quote10 With the Shadow Artists being sub-contractors for the City-State, will there be an established "artists union" being put in place to guide new players as well as veterans learning the system?
Not sure what you mean exactly...can you elaborate?
Wow.
My hat's off, Nyr. Answering the whole thread like this is a heroic undertaking.
I suppose I should say something here. Pardon me if I say something redundant, I haven't read the entire discussion.
Random shadow thoughts:
*Overall, seems interesting. I feel like things could slip out of hand, but I don't see any reason why not to at least give it a try.
*This should be one of those things that everyone knows about but no one talks about. I'm not even sure that the term "Shadow Artist" should actually be an IG phrase.
*You guys should implement the system without public announcement or documentation update. The first round of agents should be recruits rather than volunteers.
*It seems like displaying your tattoo and/or publicly making it know you're a registered agent would be the quickest/surest way to let everyone (including His Faithful) know that you're a really BAD agent.
*I think it's important to express to agents that just because you have templarate consent/support doesn't mean that if you wind up in jail you can just walk out without consequence. Being arrested by the Legions should be considered a gross failure of a contract, even if the actual goal is completed. Payment, or more, may be forfeited in such a case.
Quote from: Dar on September 26, 2013, 07:55:03 PM
In Allanak, entire societies are capable of thriving without ever needing to interact with a templar. Tuluk is different. They're two different cities. For this licensed thing to work, there has to be faith in that system. In the third doc about taking the contract out, it states "You have faith in the system" ... well, in Allanak, nobody has any faith in any system. There are no systems. They are two different cities.
That's a good point as well.
Quote from: LauraMars on September 26, 2013, 08:10:58 PM
I still want to know what happens when there's only one PC Shadow Artist in the city and someone takes out a contract to kill them.
Is that when they find out the Sun King has a time machine?
(http://jrforasteros.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Looper-Kill-Zone.jpg)
lol
Quote from: Blur on September 26, 2013, 11:04:16 PM
How about if instead of a contract system it was more of a bounty system?
This one is a nice idea, too, with the only problem being the secrecy involved (a board that tells artists what is needed and how much it charges...well...it seems prone to leaks).
Quote from: Irulan on September 26, 2013, 11:07:09 PM
I'm having some trouble with the rigidity. Along with many of you, I agree that the 'no refusal' clause is difficult to swallow. Random example; Say you are a shadow artist in Tuluk, a patron (or employer) has taken you in, fed/clothed/trained you up. Now you are 'in the system' and a Templar calls you up to mess with someone else that your Patron/employer is involved with (or is friends with, political allies etc). You can't refuse, you can't talk to your Patron about it. Your only option is to go in and actively work against your Patron's best interests. I get that this game is 'murder, corruption, betrayal' but usually you have some choice in *who* you are actively betraying, and for what interests you are doing the betraying.
Simply put, if you don't want to face the possibility of murder, corruption, and betrayal in a role that you volunteer to play, don't volunteer to play that role. Your patron doesn't need to know about what you do against their allies because you aren't working against their allies--the hiring agent is! You're simply a tool.
QuoteWhy would a patron/employer take on the cost and effort of training up a shadow artist, who could then easily be used in a contract against them? I get the 'so that you can use them yourself' answer...but why put in the effort and time and energy if they can just as easily be used against you (maybe not against you personally, but could easily be used against your best interests). Why build up a tool that can be used by others to tear yourself down? I have a hard time seeing patrons and employers going through the trouble and expense. Is it that the only people that would really benefit from spending the time and energy to help train up a shadow artist would be the templarate?
Because it's a tool, and good tools are good for the interests of Tuluk as a whole. Your rivals are also training tools that will have to be released "into the wild" later on, too. You can also work out a deal with your artist so that they agree to stay on with you and not go higher in artist rank or whatever (in other words, they can stop at Journeyman and be your artist--they're still there for generic use, but never against your house or you).
QuoteAm I understanding correctly that almost all thievery/burglery would have to be contract driven and done through the templarate? So random muggings or pick pocketing would be basically nonexistent in Tuluk? I guess I'm having a hard time wrapping my brain around this concept. So nobody in the Warrens who is a poor little thief ever steals just because they are hungry or because they are poor?
That depends on enforcement. Petty theft is illegal. You get thrown in jail for it even now, inked or not. You could just as easily say "so nobody in the Warrens who is a poor little thief gets caught and thrown in jail for their petty theft to feed themselves/make ends meet?" This could easily be a "theft is illegal" *wink wink nudge nudge thing*, too.
To those of you replying now, I see your stuff, but I'm wading through, like...page 4...and replying to questions. Sorry for the delay.
Quote from: Jherlen on September 27, 2013, 12:57:05 AM
The question isn't so much why anyone else would want to have relations with a Master Assassin, Malken -- you make some great points -- the question is why such a person themself would want to place their art or trade above their loved ones. Some people might, but some might not - by not allowing any avenue of refusal, the system as proposed pretty much ensures that anyone not fully devoted to Tuluk above all else and the artistry of their trade probably wouldn't be a shadow artist. And the people that -are- fanatical devotees, well, they probably have their niche in Tuluk just fine.
That might be a bit of the point behind it, though.
Right now, we have two issues that seem to plague Tuluk. It's not terrible, it's not horrible, it is just kinda "how it has been." I call these issues Reluctant Artist Syndrome and Loyal Artist Syndrome.
RAS -- you dabble in the art but you're not committed, so you may do something every now and then but that's it.
LAS -- you work just for one person and that's it. All work has to be approved through them.
Put both together and what happens when someone who is not employing an artist directly wants something done? They can't get it done because no PC artists are available, whether due to reluctance or loyalty.
I think this would fix that, at least, and make it a system that works for those that want artists on their payroll/partisanship (they have the perks of being able to choose their own guy and even take a cut from what their guy gets paid for work, if that's part of their arrangement) and those that want artists to do work without being fingered overtly as the contractor (they can indirectly use someone else's artist already being trained/patron'd up, and appropriately, the patron would get a cut of the proceeds).
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 10:05:18 AM
Quote from: LauraMars on September 26, 2013, 07:27:34 PM
Some assassinations. (90% of them in my case), are done by more then one person. Sometimes people dont know I exist and they're helping me kill the dude, sometimes they're following my instructions. I find that type of killing to be very fun, since it involves a great many people in little or large ways. Even if it's as simple as hiring a whore to lure a dude into an apartment.
But your type of 'no talking about a contract' kind of prevents this, doesnt it? Every artist seems to require to be a loner, since these things should not be talked about. And if you impliment a system where a shadow runner who gets the job, goes right back to the Templar to hire a 'whore' shadow runner, and 'flasher' shadow runner, and 'pickpocket' shadow runner. Suddenly, something that a group of 3-4 vagrants could scheme, discuss, and carry out in a single day evening, turns into a 7 day ordeal, where the Templar is seeking all these people out.
That's an interesting point to bring up, but I think we can make room in the system so that if an artist needs help, they can ask the templarate to sub out parts of it to other artists for assistance (and if assisting, well, they do have to talk to each other, no?).
It would be easy for Shadow Agents employing Shadow Artists to set up group contracts with the local Templar, because the Shadow Agents can pick their own Artists for specific jobs. It would be trickier when it comes to unaffiliated Artists or Artists of a different affiliation.
Quote from: Sayyadina on September 27, 2013, 01:01:05 AM
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.
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.
It's a possibility, but I'd rather implement a system with controls to ensure it works at start BEFORE loosening them...than implement a system with fewer controls and implement those later. It's easier to loosen guidelines up than it is to strengthen them.
QuoteThe 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.
Well, there's actually a couple other upsides. You know the capabilities of your own artist, so you know what they can do and you can ensure they do a task exactly how you want it done once it goes through the templarate from you. You also can arrange to get your own cut from any contracts they take from the "system" that do not come from you. You also can arrange discounted rates with your artist (either on the front end or the back end) for them doing work for you (you're providing them with other benefits like training, after all).
As to your points,
1. Yes, it does.
2. Yes, you are. So are your rivals, so is everyone that is employing an artist. If everyone is in that boat then it is not much of a detriment (though it is still one in some views).
3. And you can get rid of them if they get to that level, or beef up security if you expect a rival of equal or higher status is going to try to take you out.
4. Yes, it would reflect badly on you, but probably not as much as such things did in the past.
As for the Tragedy of the Commons, at least it would be a system that worked. You can sit back and let someone else train their own artists, and know that you're probably paying more to a patron than to the artist in the long run, which benefits the patron and makes it less of a "tragedy" when they've got a fat pocketbook that can then be used to drive more plot.
QuoteThe 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 guess House Sneaksalot needs to diversify. A House's goals shouldn't revolve around maintaining a bevy of shadow artists unless that IS the House's goal or unless a noble just happens to have that kind of coin or resources sitting around to devote towards that end. In that case, Kassigarh or Nenyuk would probably be the Houses with the most under this future system, seeking to draw in as much cash as possible from these contracts.
QuotePC 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.
There's no way for an agent to know if they're being ripped off, but they have faith in the system which is set up by this documentation.
There's no way to know if they're being ignored by the templar, but they have faith in the system...etc.
See above for the artist.
It's not secret IMM enforcement of mandates, it's the culture of the city that would enforce it by documentation. There's no secret stuff going on.
Quote from: Riev on September 27, 2013, 01:02:02 AM
I'd be more interested to see the non-lethal "message sending" situations. Its not very "Tuluki" to mug someone, or to beat them down in the street because they spat near a Winrothol or whatever. Tuluk is very about snide comments, and things happening out of the way.
Not anymore. It's not very Tuluki to mug someone, but if you need to send a message to someone that's encroaching on your turf (political, economic, or social), hiring an artist to go beat the shit out that person sure sounds like fun. Tuluk is not just about snide comments.
Quote
Which is why, I thought, the "Assassination Contracts" were the only thing you could do in Tuluk. Otherwise, it was Bard's territory. I mean, who would deface someone's home? Not a true Tuluki, for sure, that'd be too obvious! They'd add something in, that didn't match the decor, and snicker the next time they were at the bar.
A Tuluki Artist would deface someone's home on a contract to do that very thing. Sure beats spamstealing from NPCs as far as drama goes...
Quote from: Molten Heart on September 27, 2013, 01:10:50 AM
Of course there are many virtual people in the game, but they don't really effect other players directly (at least not regularly). If there's only one active shadow artist PC that's an assassin and someone takes out a contract on their lover, who's the assassin for the contract going to be? I'm sure staff could, if the templarate didn't want to approach this PC assassin, create some npc to do the job, but this seems problematic.
We've talked about this and we'd like to avoid it in two ways.
First, there'd need to be a few artists operating. Second, templars could go about "recruiting" if they felt there was a need to have more artists.
You're right, there are problems involved with creating NPCs to handle this role, and we don't really want to go down that road unless we have to do so.
Quote from: hyzhenhok on September 27, 2013, 01:46:47 AM
Maybe just add in a wrinkle to allow shadow artists to work for themselves on occasion for occasions when business is slow, or for a shadow artist whose skill set/skill level doesn't quite match any current contract. You could require the shadow artist to pre-clear small self-sustaining jobs with their templar handler, with the understanding that a small percentage of the profits belong to the government, and that would add in some IC flexibility while maintaining the new feel that the government really does own every contracted criminal in the city.
That might be interesting if there were an IC tie in to it, not really sure...but it's a good idea.
Quote from: slvrmoontiger on September 27, 2013, 01:48:45 AM
Krath, that would just suck to have you contracted to kill your own mate or lover or whatnot. Perhaps there should be something about registering who your lover or mate might be so that the Faithful don't choose you for those contracts.
I might be morbid in the kind of roleplay I prefer, but if I were going to play a Tuluki artist assassin-type under this system, I'd relish the chance to have to face this kind of decision in-game. Would I kill the mate? Would I protect them and run off to Red Storm? Would I try to figure out some way to call off the contract so that I'm not "refusing?" Would I try to figure out who hired me for the task, kill my mate anyway--but then find a way to kill the person that made me kill my mate?
Quote from: janeshephard on September 27, 2013, 02:08:07 AM
Crazy idea out of left field:
Move actual licensing to His Chosen. Keep registration with The Faithful.
Recruitment
The Shadow Agent approaches a noble and says "I'll work for you or your buddies." Or a noble finds promising individuals and offers to be their broker (and even helps get them registered).
Brokering
The noble then acts as a broker for those who hold some influence with him. Same rules apply on the caste system and targets. If these rules are broken and His Faithful find out a heavy fine is levied, qynars re-assigned etc. Don't do it unless you notify staff and are super careful.
This reintroduces Loyal Artist Syndrome.
QuoteWrapping up
Talia has gone missing. It's been several weeks. The Chosen Lord has a private meeting with a Faithful Lord/Lady and mentions which contracts were fulfilled that month. He never discloses the names of who did what.
So the templarate doesn't know what's going on?
QuoteExemption
His Legion, His Faithful and His Chosen are all immune. They shouldn't be killing each other anyway. There's a war on!
It's a very Tuluki solution I think.
Thoughts?
They totally should be killing each other if they have good reason. Political power plays don't stop for external threats; if anything, they might use them to their advantage. Honestly I'm not a big fan of this idea.
The project seems like an interesting direction to take things in. It's documented, unlike many aspects still up in the air right now with most clans undergoing revamps, and that helps. It's in the spirit the North was (re)made in, and goes a ways towards promoting the [slowly diminishing] distinctions with the South. I only have two issues with it.
1) Templars will never be unbiased in acting as brokers, regardless of however many rules might be set forth. This is due to OOC as well as IC biases every player/character inevitably has, even those trusted in sponsored roles. Even if one assumes OOC bias can be somehow overcome, the IC bias of the Templars will continue to prevail. Now more then ever, when their political status and plans are in turmoil over the merger. We can be asked to imagine a world where that won't happen, but after decades of experience, some elephants in the room can at least be acknowledged and worked around even if they can't be removed. Bias being one of them. Which brings me to my second issue...
2) Templars themselves should not be exempt from contracts. They become political targets the moment they take on the mantle, from both within and without the government. They continue to hold a family name, which carries it's own allegiances regardless of appearances, and the are quite simply, human. Tuluk is built on the principle of blind faith in the system, and none are supposed to believe that more deeply than the Templars. That means they should be willing to accept the consequences of that system, and their own actions. Even if that means another Templar might try to take them out or otherwise hinder them for political reasons. Their status protects them from contracts from anyone below them, but they should not be immune to the system as a whole.
If the system as proposed can't work directly with patrons acting as brokers, or agents themselves being able to directly contracts artists, then I firmly believe some third, neutral party is needed. This could be any number of things, including a family tasked with the brokering of contracts by Muk himself. They should have no high social benefits from this status, should not be exempt from the law, and should be barred from any and all political maneuvers or alliances. This could be a PC, or perhaps more ideally, a staff-animated NPC at least at higher levels. At least if bias exists in such cases, it can be closely monitored by staff as a whole and there won't be any IC loopholes that can be used for OOC vendettas.
Those are my thoughts and concerns, thus far. How this plays out in reality, passed the docs, will be telling.
Quote from: Jherlen on September 27, 2013, 02:23:04 AM
How did we get in that situation to begin with? I'd say the templar done fucked up, he should have known to pick an artist that wasn't emotionally attached to the target. That's an IC mistake he can bear IC consequences for. Since the broker is a templar, he can of course kill the artist for refusing anyway if he really wants to keep the hit ultra-secret. But that shouldn't be the only avenue to go down. I can see times when disappearing a skillful shadow artist because he didn't want to take a contract would probably be worse than just risking the target might learn and be on their guard. Leaving it open to possibilities is way better than having a doc saying This Must Always Happen Exactly Just So.
We can relax the standards on the wording of the documentation to allow some leeway in the case of a problematic contract, but your point is quite valid that a templar probably shouldn't be picking an artist to kill their own lover.
As for these points:
QuoteBut besides love, there are lots of other viable reasons I can see an artist wanting to refuse -- most of these will probably be far more common anyway.
- The contract is beyond their skill and they know it, and they don't want to risk failure or death.
- The contract is beneath their skill and isn't a challenge, and they don't want to waste their time
- The reward offered isn't worth the risk, or isn't enough to cover expenses
- They're too busy with other work
1) Templar shouldn't be giving a contract to someone that can't do it.
2) Artist shouldn't have that kind of attitude; if they got asked to do it is because they were the best one for the job (or the only PC available?)
3) This should never, ever, ever be an issue; the reward should always be worth the risk and also be enough to cover expenses
4) Not being able to refuse is not the same as not being able to delay or negotiate details.
QuoteAll of those reasons and more are part of a typical negotiation if you're trying to hire a criminal anywhere else, but in Tuluk, since the criminal has no power to refuse offers, they're at the helpless mercy of the broker arranging their deal. And that broker is a templar. And the templar will kill you if you refuse. So who are the only people who become shadow artists in Tuluk? People who have criminal skills but are anything but criminals, and are willing to use those skills any way they're told to by the templars. And who won't become shadow artists? Anyone who has criminal skills but would prefer to be the master of their own destiny and take jobs on their own terms. I suspect the latter group is larger than the former, especially since your typical criminal type probably has issues with following the rules/laws to begin with. Shadow artistry would seem to be more of a niche, when the docs apparently want it to be the norm. So how do you bring it back to the norm? Make the system less rigidly do-or-die for the artist. There have been lots of great suggestions on how to do that in this thread besides mine.
The helpless mercy of a templar they should be trusting to have the best interests of this system at heart...yeah. And no, it doesn't say what happens when you refuse, but killing might not be the first or only option of punishment. As for the rest of this, the best I have to offer is a *shrug*. If you want to play a criminal that plays by guidelines and has this kind of contract work, play a shadow artist. If you want to play a criminal that does stuff on their own terms, do what you want, there are other places that allow that much more easily, and you can even give it a go in Tuluk if you think you can handle it. This isn't meant to be for
everyone.
Quote from: Jingo on September 27, 2013, 03:43:34 AM
I just hopes this gives people something to do.
I've played in tuluk as a fairly well known assassin. Nobody wanted anyone dead, nobody even tasked him to spy on their rivals.
Thanks, I'm glad some former assassins are chiming in...it got a little lonely, no?
Quote from: Quirk on September 27, 2013, 06:53:16 AM
How do we stop this happening?
The pretty obvious answer seems to be "talk to staff", at least to me. If someone's not playing anymore, they're virtually around and can't be targeted. This is an entirely OOC situation and I imagine it'd be easier to tell all involved "uh, the player of that PC's not playing. So maybe this will need to be called off til they do return." Virtually killing them would be unfair to the victim. Storage would be unwarranted for the victim, I think, too. Leave it at an OOC issue and I think it's fine.
QuoteThis also fixes the lovers case, and possibly the partisan case, without Amos ever getting the right of refusal. In the lovers case, if Amos is engaged to kill his lover, he will return much later and admit his failure. Talia isn't likely to engage Amos for the task, because the cost to money and reputation is unlikely to deter him. In the partisan case, a patron who has instilled sufficient loyalty in their partisan might still be safe; a templar would have to exercise great care in turning such a tool against its creator.
That's one interesting take on it as well...
QuoteWe will however also need some means of escape for a templar asked to handle contracts for tasks where no suitable Shadow Artist exists, or the Shadow Artist who's perfect for the job accepts it and then goes out and gets eaten by a defiler.
They can sit on it or even tell the person they'll need to try and find someone worthy of handling it. In the case of the latter, I think I covered that--refund the agent half of their money (or all, if we want to be more generous) and try again with another artist later.
Quote from: Lizzie on September 27, 2013, 07:56:20 AM
What happens if there's a *templar* who wants someone's reputation smeared, or loot looted, or life taken - but the target hasn't broken any actual laws so there's no grounds for arrest? She can make something up, and avoid having to pay an Artist or even getting another party involved. Or, she could pretend there's a broker, and hire an Artist herself. Or, if that's not allowed, she could easily wait for someone else to get pissed off by the target, and broker the deal. Which she would find her absolute best person, charge the absolute least money to the person wanting the job done - and cover the balance to the best person out of her pocket with no one being the wiser.
I think we'd discourage templar PCs from just trumping up crap so they can get someone killed. We sorta do that anyway. There are multiple templars, and if a templar wants someone smeared/looted, they can certainly go that route through another templar as broker. And since it's a templar, of course, they can run things through to the artist almost directly (still needs to go through another templar?). If they want them killed, I think we'd like to know on our end first before that proceeds, especially if it's just a personal thing.
QuoteSeems to me like the templar holds ALL the cards - not just most of them, or some of them. The templar can do the reverse, for the reverse scenario - a broker asks for the ruination of someone the templar wants to remain unsullied. So the templar charges an exhorbitant fee, contracts the absolute least competent person to do the job, pays that least competent person a fraction of what that person -should- get for it, knowing that the artist is likely to not even bother trying, and fail miserably.
They could if they weren't disallowed from that. Again, they're meant to keep this system working; evidence of corruption in this system makes it not work.
QuoteAlso, if you're the artist and you don't want to do the job, you could just take it, and not do it. And claim you tried but failed.
I guess you could...now what would that mean afterwards, though?
QuoteIn other words - there should be more of an incentive to WANT to be licensed, other than "it's required." Because what assassin in their right mind would volunteer to get a license to kill people, if he knows that at some point he might be required to kill his own family?
Because it pays pretty damn well. Again, you'd be surprised what the stipulations were on that before.
Quote from: Barzalene on September 27, 2013, 08:51:11 AM
I'm not caught up with this whole thread yet. I like the idea of buyouts for assassins. I hate the idea of but outs for victims. Now there is a real disincentive to using the system. In stead of getting what you paid for you've now alerted someone. Now they can come back at you. Now they're alert that you're out to get them. (And really we can usually figure out who our enemies are. We can narrow the field at least) so the person who contracted is in a worse position than when they started.
I agree, the idea of an assassin buyout might be a good idea, but definitely
not for the victim.
Quote from: Barzalene on September 27, 2013, 08:54:28 AM
And do you get your upfront fees back?
Years ago (2002? 04?) the guild would take money to kill someone then let them buy out of that contract. This always struck me as a crappy business practice. Sure you get paid twice for one job, but would ever want to use you a second time. After all you could have people not dead for free.
Right now it's planned to be:
agent pays broker
broker pays half to artist
artist fails? agent gets half or more back (templarate still would keep its cut in most if not all cases)
Quote from: Patuk on September 27, 2013, 10:04:39 AM
Master shadow artists, perhaps, are the exception to this rule; you'd rather see them alive, I'm fairly sure. But then, consider what kind of a place Tuluk is. Tuluk is a city-state where the armed forces are lead by direct delegates of an immortal sorceror-king, fielding soldiers such as religiously fanatic elite slaves and immensely loyal legionnaires whose practices I cannot detail, but who are very much immensely loyal as well. Novice or journeyman shadow artists aside, if a master shadow assassin is not comparable in loyalty to a templar, fanatic or officer, they are not cut out to be the epitome of artistry. If, by the time you're a master shadow artist, you hold things in more value than the orders you receive, you aren't a good master shadow artist.
Good point.
QuoteAlso consider the whole situation of 'what if person X wants to off templar partisan Y.' Firstly, assassinations aren't your everyday occurence; I'm imagining they'd cost a whole lot more than things like rumors spread, people roughened up or items planted/stolen. Now consider that, though it may be secret that said partisan is a shadow artist, said person still is a templar's affiliate. The money to afford such an operation would be well above what any mere commoner would realistically be able to pay*, and no templar would choose a partisan commoner's wellbeing over that of such a rich person's. Secondly, consider that, since being a partisan is a supposedly prestigious job, a Templar should be able to find a dozen people to replace their now-lost pet and fund them well with the contract's money even if their affiliate ends up dead. Between commoners being far, far below templars, commoners being utterly and entirely displosable, and the amount of money and social class that such money requires to attain, contracts on templar pets being manufactured is nothing more than a passing nuisance.
Also another good point.
Quote from: Riya OniSenshi on September 27, 2013, 10:04:51 AM
I'm sorry, but I don't see this as any sort of good change.
It puts even more power into the hands of Templars (especially new Templars) of questionable integrity, and does not provide incentive to choose non-killing options in any way.
Well, it provides the options there to do those at least, which didn't exist before. Also, templars of questionable integrity? Sure, the templars might be in general, but that doesn't mean they can't be seen as neutral in one area. Tuluk is becoming a bit more Orwellian; "fear the templarate" and "trust the templarate" shouldn't be too difficult to maintain in a Tuluki's mind when the two thoughts are about different aspects of the Templarate. The players are not of questionable integrity, for sure. They're playing sponsored roles, these are part of their docs, and while they've been briefed on them prior to the general playerbase and have offered their own feedback...they do know that the way the docs are is the way that the sponsored roles should be handled.
Quote
Plus there are the problems such as Quirk mentions in his post - problems like overlapping time zones or lack thereof.
That's an OOC problem, not an IC problem--pretty easily fixed.
Quote
Also the no refusal thing is the part where I said to myself, "Yep, never going to be a licensed shadow artist ever."
If you want to play a role where you get to pick and choose what jobs you want, an indie not tied to this system would be better for you.
Quote from: Quirk on September 27, 2013, 10:24:27 AM
Wow.
My hat's off, Nyr. Answering the whole thread like this is a heroic undertaking.
I don't think this kind of change could be done in a different way. Not everyone is going to like it, everyone has their own ideas on what might be better, and some have criticism that needs to be addressed BY the documentation. Even with people going over the docs earlier on before this public release, we couldn't possibly cover every eventuality in advance.
Quote from: Marauder Moe on September 27, 2013, 10:25:08 AM
I suppose I should say something here. Pardon me if I say something redundant, I haven't read the entire discussion.
Random shadow thoughts:
*Overall, seems interesting. I feel like things could slip out of hand, but I don't see any reason why not to at least give it a try.
*This should be one of those things that everyone knows about but no one talks about. I'm not even sure that the term "Shadow Artist" should actually be an IG phrase.
*You guys should implement the system without public announcement or documentation update. The first round of agents should be recruits rather than volunteers.
*It seems like displaying your tattoo and/or publicly making it know you're a registered agent would be the quickest/surest way to let everyone (including His Faithful) know that you're a really BAD agent.
*I think it's important to express to agents that just because you have templarate consent/support doesn't mean that if you wind up in jail you can just walk out without consequence. Being arrested by the Legions should be considered a gross failure of a contract, even if the actual goal is completed. Payment, or more, may be forfeited in such a case.
Three points here need a response for sure:
Quote*This should be one of those things that everyone knows about but no one talks about. I'm not even sure that the term "Shadow Artist" should actually be an IG phrase.
Maybe there's a better word for it, but people have used this as a euphemism for assassins and thieves since forever ago, even though it's not in docs. Not sure where it originated, honestly.
Quote*You guys should implement the system without public announcement or documentation update. The first round of agents should be recruits rather than volunteers.
Templars recruiting potential artists is something that would be nice to see. As far as how to implement it, it IS more complicated than it was before and ICly, no one has any clue about this, so I think we'd have to...uh...say something...right?
Quote*It seems like displaying your tattoo and/or publicly making it know you're a registered agent would be the quickest/surest way to let everyone (including His Faithful) know that you're a really BAD agent.
Well, assuming actual rank associated with each artist...how would someone know you're a Master if you don't have a sweet tattoo saying you're one? You can't talk about what it is you do, but having it "written" all over your body is a little like a calling card itself.
Quote from: palomar on September 27, 2013, 11:01:57 AM
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 10:05:18 AM
Quote from: LauraMars on September 26, 2013, 07:27:34 PM
Some assassinations. (90% of them in my case), are done by more then one person. Sometimes people dont know I exist and they're helping me kill the dude, sometimes they're following my instructions. I find that type of killing to be very fun, since it involves a great many people in little or large ways. Even if it's as simple as hiring a whore to lure a dude into an apartment.
But your type of 'no talking about a contract' kind of prevents this, doesnt it? Every artist seems to require to be a loner, since these things should not be talked about. And if you impliment a system where a shadow runner who gets the job, goes right back to the Templar to hire a 'whore' shadow runner, and 'flasher' shadow runner, and 'pickpocket' shadow runner. Suddenly, something that a group of 3-4 vagrants could scheme, discuss, and carry out in a single day evening, turns into a 7 day ordeal, where the Templar is seeking all these people out.
That's an interesting point to bring up, but I think we can make room in the system so that if an artist needs help, they can ask the templarate to sub out parts of it to other artists for assistance (and if assisting, well, they do have to talk to each other, no?).
It would be easy for Shadow Agents employing Shadow Artists to set up group contracts with the local Templar, because the Shadow Agents can pick their own Artists for specific jobs. It would be trickier when it comes to unaffiliated Artists or Artists of a different affiliation.
Yeah, so maybe that's a perk of having several artists under your employ? You might have 3 Journeymen that won't ever go higher in rank because they want to stay with your House...but you can use all three on one job, ensuring success.
Quote from: Ouroboros on September 27, 2013, 11:40:44 AM
The project seems like an interesting direction to take things in. It's documented, unlike many aspects still up in the air right now with most clans undergoing revamps, and that helps. It's in the spirit the North was (re)made in, and goes a ways towards promoting the [slowly diminishing] distinctions with the South. I only have two issues with it.
1) Templars will never be unbiased in acting as brokers, regardless of however many rules might be set forth. This is due to OOC as well as IC biases every player/character inevitably has, even those trusted in sponsored roles. Even if one assumes OOC bias can be somehow overcome, the IC bias of the Templars will continue to prevail. Now more then ever, when their political status and plans are in turmoil over the merger. We can be asked to imagine a world where that won't happen, but after decades of experience, some elephants in the room can at least be acknowledged and worked around even if they can't be removed. Bias being one of them. Which brings me to my second issue...
Just like an artist would have to do their job, a templar would have to do their job--which means making the system work. Sure, they might HAVE IC biases. Acting on them by manipulating this brokerage system would be foolhardy. Acting on those in other ways sounds more reasonable.
Quote2) Templars themselves should not be exempt from contracts. They become political targets the moment they take on the mantle, from both within and without the government. They continue to hold a family name, which carries it's own allegiances regardless of appearances, and the are quite simply, human. Tuluk is built on the principle of blind faith in the system, and none are supposed to believe that more deeply than the Templars. That means they should be willing to accept the consequences of that system, and their own actions. Even if that means another Templar might try to take them out or otherwise hinder them for political reasons. Their status protects them from contracts from anyone below them, but they should not be immune to the system as a whole.
We brought this up in the first place and here's why we disagreed on it...but first, a quick correction. Templars do hold the
name of their family. They do not have allegiance to their family. That is drilled into the heads of templar PCs (despite beliefs otherwise).
First, it'd need at LEAST a templar to do the contract in the first place.
Second, if a templar in Tuluk wants another templar in Tuluk dead, that sounds like a plot ripe for some discussion with staff so we can figure out whether this makes sense or not.
Maybe it can be loosened up in the future, but as stated above and earlier, making it fast and loose now might spell trouble for those wishing to find the holes in the system that were NOT intended to be there.
QuoteIf the system as proposed can't work directly with patrons acting as brokers, or agents themselves being able to directly contracts artists, then I firmly believe some third, neutral party is needed. This could be any number of things, including a family tasked with the brokering of contracts by Muk himself. They should have no high social benefits from this status, should not be exempt from the law, and should be barred from any and all political maneuvers or alliances. This could be a PC, or perhaps more ideally, a staff-animated NPC at least at higher levels. At least if bias exists in such cases, it can be closely monitored by staff as a whole and there won't be any IC loopholes that can be used for OOC vendettas.
Actually Rathustra hit on a fun idea of having a confession-booth style thing. I never really thought of it being its own script-worthy event where someone goes in, writes on a board, then leaves, and it goes to staff, but...hmm...
Would that really get rid of the appearance of bias? Maybe...but would it increase staff work? Yep...we'd have to review these cases ourselves or sub it out to templar PCs, which would be defeating the purpose anyway.
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 11:48:12 AM
Quote from: Quirk on September 27, 2013, 06:53:16 AM
How do we stop this happening?
The pretty obvious answer seems to be "talk to staff", at least to me. If someone's not playing anymore, they're virtually around and can't be targeted. This is an entirely OOC situation and I imagine it'd be easier to tell all involved "uh, the player of that PC's not playing. So maybe this will need to be called off til they do return." Virtually killing them would be unfair to the victim. Storage would be unwarranted for the victim, I think, too. Leave it at an OOC issue and I think it's fine.
Um. In my example, the target, Malik, was quite definitely playing. Plenty of other PCs are interacting with Malik, including the increasingly annoyed person who took out the contract.
The cited problem is that Amos and Malik have no playing time overlap, and it's liable to take some time to discover this. Possibly quite a long time. Having discovered this, the player of Amos can talk to staff, but - Malik's logging in regularly, what are they going to do? By the time the situation is resolved and Amos is given a free pass on this one and someone else is set on Malik's track, we might be RL months down the road, and any number of events may have happened since. Talking to staff takes time, and if it's not as clear-cut as "so-and-so is dead / not logging in", it's quite probable that the first request won't clear things up. It also seems like a burden for staff if they have to field a new request every time a target leaves the city or doesn't log in for a couple of weeks or is generally hard to find.
Besides this, it seems to me that if taking out a contract becomes "pay a large sum up front, and then your target might get hit a long time from now", people are going to cut out the middle man and make private, faster-acting arrangements. I strongly feel that there needs to be some easy way to write off a contract that cannot be completed within a reasonable timespan for OOC reasons (or IC reasons, such as a fleeing target) which leads to no worse than a slap on the wrist for the artist - even if it's just that there exists a time limit, and the artist reaching that time limit without success incurs a fine for their very discreet failure and is taken off the contract.
I think there remains a problem with templar oversight, though - even with very close OOC scrutiny, it may not be possible to be sure that a templar is deliberately setting a contract up to fail rather than just screwing up.
As an employer can you ask? Can you opt not to hire anyone who may have conflicting loyalties? Can you ask them to strip to check them for clues?
Quote from: Barzalene on September 27, 2013, 12:25:33 PM
As an employer can you ask? Can you opt not to hire anyone who may have conflicting loyalties? Can you ask them to strip to check them for clues?
Considering Zalanthas I don't see why one couldn't.
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 12:13:13 PMYeah, so maybe that's a perk of having several artists under your employ? You might have 3 Journeymen that won't ever go higher in rank because they want to stay with your House...but you can use all three on one job, ensuring success.
That's an interesting way to look at it.
My new question is: If a shadow artist can't refuse contracts, can they refuse to be raised in rank?
Because that would be a way to have some sort of choice. You don't want to kill your employer's dudes? Choose not to become a Master-level artist. Depending on the rules for who can take what job, and how high your lover/friends social statuses are, this might be a way to avoid killing them, too. Not as ideal as being able to refuse to take a contract, in my opinion, but potentially workable.
Quote from: Quirk on September 27, 2013, 12:24:49 PM
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 11:48:12 AM
Quote from: Quirk on September 27, 2013, 06:53:16 AM
How do we stop this happening?
The pretty obvious answer seems to be "talk to staff", at least to me. If someone's not playing anymore, they're virtually around and can't be targeted. This is an entirely OOC situation and I imagine it'd be easier to tell all involved "uh, the player of that PC's not playing. So maybe this will need to be called off til they do return." Virtually killing them would be unfair to the victim. Storage would be unwarranted for the victim, I think, too. Leave it at an OOC issue and I think it's fine.
Um. In my example, the target, Malik, was quite definitely playing. Plenty of other PCs are interacting with Malik, including the increasingly annoyed person who took out the contract.
The cited problem is that Amos and Malik have no playing time overlap, and it's liable to take some time to discover this. Possibly quite a long time. Having discovered this, the player of Amos can talk to staff, but - Malik's logging in regularly, what are they going to do? By the time the situation is resolved and Amos is given a free pass on this one and someone else is set on Malik's track, we might be RL months down the road, and any number of events may have happened since. Talking to staff takes time, and if it's not as clear-cut as "so-and-so is dead / not logging in", it's quite probable that the first request won't clear things up. It also seems like a burden for staff if they have to field a new request every time a target leaves the city or doesn't log in for a couple of weeks or is generally hard to find.
Oh, derp, I misread!
In that case, definitely should be a way to fix things because it is an OOC problem.
Quote
Besides this, it seems to me that if taking out a contract becomes "pay a large sum up front, and then your target might get hit a long time from now", people are going to cut out the middle man and make private, faster-acting arrangements. I strongly feel that there needs to be some easy way to write off a contract that cannot be completed within a reasonable timespan for OOC reasons (or IC reasons, such as a fleeing target) which leads to no worse than a slap on the wrist for the artist - even if it's just that there exists a time limit, and the artist reaching that time limit without success incurs a fine for their very discreet failure and is taken off the contract.
I agree, there needs to be a way to back out for OOC problems. Time limits we talked about but left out for the purposes of freedom on the artist end, but you bring up a good point about the agent's end.
Quote
I think there remains a problem with templar oversight, though - even with very close OOC scrutiny, it may not be possible to be sure that a templar is deliberately setting a contract up to fail rather than just screwing up.
I'll be blunt about it...if that's a concern, it already
is one and it's way worse now in perception than it is in reality (i.e., people already think templars are biased to their house of origin or that they deliberately screw up contracts, so how is this any different?)
Quote from: Barzalene on September 27, 2013, 12:25:33 PM
As an employer can you ask? Can you opt not to hire anyone who may have conflicting loyalties? Can you ask them to strip to check them for clues?
Do it if you want. Monthly strip check to see who's a master and who's getting their throat cut by the boss for not telling the boss!
Quote from: Taven on September 27, 2013, 12:31:18 PM
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 12:13:13 PMYeah, so maybe that's a perk of having several artists under your employ? You might have 3 Journeymen that won't ever go higher in rank because they want to stay with your House...but you can use all three on one job, ensuring success.
That's an interesting way to look at it.
My new question is: If a shadow artist can't refuse contracts, can they refuse to be raised in rank?
Yeah, I didn't make that clear but that was implied. Or maybe just implied in my head. Just like a bard could choose to NOT be a bard in rank (and thus stay with their house), an artist can choose to NOT become a master artist. However, this probably would need some teeth...as in, if you refuse, you are never going to be a master artist.
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 12:39:26 PM
Quote from: Taven on September 27, 2013, 12:31:18 PM
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 12:13:13 PMYeah, so maybe that's a perk of having several artists under your employ? You might have 3 Journeymen that won't ever go higher in rank because they want to stay with your House...but you can use all three on one job, ensuring success.
That's an interesting way to look at it.
My new question is: If a shadow artist can't refuse contracts, can they refuse to be raised in rank?
Yeah, I didn't make that clear but that was implied. Or maybe just implied in my head. Just like a bard could choose to NOT be a bard in rank (and thus stay with their house), an artist can choose to NOT become a master artist. However, this probably would need some teeth...as in, if you refuse, you are never going to be a master artist.
I think it was implied, but I may have skipped over the implication, since there's not yet (nor may there ever be) public documentation on how you go from rank-to-rank.
Would it have to be that you do it now or never? Because if I'm a shadow artist, and I adore that loveable noble from House X, and she goes and dies... I may not give a shit about her replacement or the new employees said replacement hires. Or if I'm worried about my mate, who's just some nobody hunter that I could be ordered to kill, I might not want to be a Master. But, oh hey, a tregil ate him. Since I know that I will never love anyone the way I love him, I may want to be a Master shadow artist in the future.
I guess it really depends if Master rank is something thrust upon you (in which case there should be some sort of penalty for refusing), or if it's something you seek (if I have to do X, Y, and Z to become a Master, I'll just never do Z, until I'm ready). I personally think that the latter case offers more flexibility, which is good.
I realize the above example might be silly, since a mid-level assassin could probably be hired to kill some hunter nobody, but pretend it makes sense for the sake of argument. You can mentally adjust it in your head for "oh, my mate is actually this that and the other thing, so I can't kill them now, but could be forced to later as a Master assassin". Or something. >.>
I have grave concerns about partisans requiring the status of their patron in order to act against. This means if Amos joins up with Faithful Lord Fatpants, he can basically screw all the rules regarding anyone who isn't a Templar and never face any consequences. If that partisan in just Joe Hunter otherwise, that seems like quite an extreme immunity if Chosen Lady FooFoo can't even get rid of some out of line commoner.
Further, I'm curious if you intend to work more incentive into reasons to avoid murder as the contract option, especially for low ranking people. Amos stole Jim's girlfriend seems far too petty a reason for Templars to act on some commoner's behalf. Perhaps a line to draw on for who can actually request eliminations? (Sergeant + commoner ranks for instance) This would mean you'd have to get your boss in line with your reasoning in order to bring the knife on someone.
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 12:37:04 PM
Actually Rathustra hit on a fun idea of having a confession-booth style thing. I never really thought of it being its own script-worthy event where someone goes in, writes on a board, then leaves, and it goes to staff, but...hmm...
Would that really get rid of the appearance of bias? Maybe...but would it increase staff work? Yep...we'd have to review these cases ourselves or sub it out to templar PCs, which would be defeating the purpose anyway.
You wouldn't need to review all the cases. The knowledge that some cases are reviewed and the poster's might be among them could be enough to influence behaviour, Panopticon-style.
I wonder how the non-lethal contracts will be accomplished.
If you're a maxxed burglar and a templar says "Your mission is to Deface Kadian Property" - and you sneak into their estate and trash the garden, will the imms help out and change the room description? Or do you need to rely on coded drop descs and stuff that will vanish with the next reboot?
Quote from: OnlyChicken on September 27, 2013, 01:03:59 AM
Furthermore, doesn't rejecting a contract compromise the solvency of the system? Now, you can go and warn your friend. They slip the next assassin, and the system fails. Your reputation is ruined, and you're likely the new guest of honor at a half-giant hackfest.
Yep. Sounds like this generates the conflict us Care Bears typically dread, but others desire. :P
Seriously, though, I anticipate that Artists who open their mouths after declining a contract would rapidly find the "invisible hand" of Tuluki customs correcting them.
Oh my God. I'm not even through the first page and already I'm [self edited].
1) I really hate that you can't put a hit out on someone socially above you or Templars. Like hate it. It means that in the land of the Sun King you'll have to break his precious law to do so, which means you'll never get a shadow artist -to- do it, which means you'll have to resort to finding people outside Tuluk to do your dirty work. How realistic is that for a notoriously racist, heretic society? To have to go elsewhere? What's to stop that"patron" from snitching on the one who wants to kill the higher caste victim. For shame! So I, as a shadow artist am gonna go with my "patron" and say "Yes, Lady Templar, I'd like to purchase a contract on YOU. Oh yes, thank you for the fast approval! Do pick someone who'll actually -get- you, or do I take my half back now?". Oh no, cause "Templars are exempt as contracted targets.". This is hugely unfair to the game world and it makes templars as untouchable as fucking Tek and Utep themselves in Tuluk. Ridiculous.
2) How are these Templars supposed to know if the prospect is worthy? Set them to task BEFORE getting inked? Have them, egads, break their own laws?!?!? Jeepers!
3) Finding a Templar to take out a contract is like finding a frigid gypsy. Let's hope the new one order, under the Sun King, indivisible with the illusion of liberty and "justice" for all (unless the person you're trying/wanting to kill is the templar that killed your sister, in which case, you're shit out of luck) proves better for those people having a hard time getting in touch with an agent.
Are we forbidding Templars from killing anyone then? Course we're not.
4) Failure to complete a contract appropriately may result in punishment ranging from simple fines to revocation of registration to outright disappearance. - So are we now putting on a time limit on contracts? What happens if your target doesn't log in for a month (cause the player is fighting a war in Afghanistan) is staff gonna be telling these templar players/artist players/contracting players that the OOC reasons are valid and you can't kill off the one who failed?
I'm gonna stop and take a step back, maybe read everything, smoke a joint/have a drink/murder a puppy and think about this so much. All I keep thinking is, all the more reason to not play in Tuluk, and I really wanna. I really do.
Quote from: OnlyChicken on September 27, 2013, 02:52:56 AM
What you're asking for is the ability to perform like an independent, unaffiliated contract killer with the full rights to negotiate contracts while simultaneously working within the system and retaining all of the privilege and status of that institution. You want your cake and you wanna eat it, too, as the saying goes. I can't blame you for that, but it doesn't make you right. An oppressive city-state run by a god-King dictator is an oppressive city-state; there is no democracy, or even illusion of choice.
<snip>
If you wanna be that guy, do it, but outside of the system.
Yeah, I guess I am asking for independent contractors who want to work but don't want to be more-or-less sworn agents of the Templarate to be viable. For a thriving criminal community that has more than one dimension, I think they need to be. The thing is, what I'm asking for
is already in the system today. I'm worried that by making Shadow Artistry the only viable way to be a sneaky lawful criminal in Tuluk, you're actually shutting out many other types of characters who would want to play that role, and work within a lawful system like they can today, but with different motivations.
You seem to want to play somebody who's cold-blooded and totally devoted to whatever jobs the templars would throw at you, and that's a cool role too, but should that really be the only role available for lawful crime in Tuluk? Let's be honest, you can play that same cold-blooded devotee in Allanak, with a templar's backing, and it'd be pretty much the same in practice. Tuluk has just set up more formality around it, but hasn't expanded the area of the game. I'd like to see it expanded.
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 10:56:48 AM
Right now, we have two issues that seem to plague Tuluk. It's not terrible, it's not horrible, it is just kinda "how it has been." I call these issues Reluctant Artist Syndrome and Loyal Artist Syndrome.
RAS -- you dabble in the art but you're not committed, so you may do something every now and then but that's it.
LAS -- you work just for one person and that's it. All work has to be approved through them.
Put both together and what happens when someone who is not employing an artist directly wants something done? They can't get it done because no PC artists are available, whether due to reluctance or loyalty.
I think this would fix that, at least, and make it a system that works for those that want artists on their payroll/partisanship (they have the perks of being able to choose their own guy and even take a cut from what their guy gets paid for work, if that's part of their arrangement) and those that want artists to do work without being fingered overtly as the contractor (they can indirectly use someone else's artist already being trained/patron'd up, and appropriately, the patron would get a cut of the proceeds).
You've identified part of the problem, but I think your solution is just going to create more issues of its own. The way to encourage more lawful criminals in Tuluk is not necessarily to force those criminals to do jobs for templars. It's perhaps encouraging more ways for them to find jobs - the templars could have a hand in that, but putting all the coins in their basket raises issues that have come up across this thread.
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 09:40:05 AM
Quote from: Jherlen on September 26, 2013, 06:58:46 PM
Since the system is double-blind, the broker has all the power in negotiating the cost and the artist. So depending who you're after and how the templar feels about it, you might get Nightshade Silentstrike the unparalleled assassin to do your contract for 200 sid (because he can't refuse anyway), or you might get charged 5000 sid for Amos the tall, muscular 0-day burglar. This is why it seems like the broker shouldn't be a political entity so that contracting agents can at least entertain an illusion of fairness and impartiality.
But again, that's an expectation that the templar is going to do that...when the rules are such that they won't, at least not at this time.
Nyr, you're talking about a lot of these problems being fixed because people will "have faith in the system", "templars have rules they will follow", "templar's won't/shouldn't do this or that", etc. Many of these scenarios are plausible ICly, under the system we've seen so far. It's a shame to shut them down because of documentorial fiat. What we haven't seen is a compelling incentive
why templars will
want to enforce the system fairly. What do they, personally, gain from it? Or are we admitting Tuluk is a culture where templars aren't motivated by personal/political gain?
Part of what makes a templar scary is that by and large, there
are no rules around what they can do to the average Commoner Amos. They have to face consequences for their actions, but I think it's a huge loss if we tell people that they can just trust templars won't screw them over because they have this abstract system defined by documentation to uphold. I want templars to be corrupt and screw people over. I want them to have internal struggles and fight each other and try desperately to foil each other's plans, ruin their contracts, etc. That all goes out the window if we start placing constraints that they have to adjucate things like this fairly. Words like "fair" and "rules" and words like "templar" should not go hand in hand.
Tuluk needs a system where crime can be considered lawful, where PCs are able to find other PCs to commit crimes for them, where lawful-criminal PCs can have incentive to work within the system while still being self-serving, and where the templarate can tacitly approve of such activities without templars needing to get their hands dirty administering all of them, at the expense of their own interests. I think that's achievable! I just think this system needs to be iterated on to get there. I think the gaps can be closed by removing some of the rigid "this always is how things go" language, rather than by demanding the IC and OOC trust of people involved that the system will Always Work.
Quote from: Quirk on September 27, 2013, 01:03:39 PM
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 12:37:04 PM
Actually Rathustra hit on a fun idea of having a confession-booth style thing. I never really thought of it being its own script-worthy event where someone goes in, writes on a board, then leaves, and it goes to staff, but...hmm...
Would that really get rid of the appearance of bias? Maybe...but would it increase staff work? Yep...we'd have to review these cases ourselves or sub it out to templar PCs, which would be defeating the purpose anyway.
You wouldn't need to review all the cases. The knowledge that some cases are reviewed and the poster's might be among them could be enough to influence behaviour, Panopticon-style.
But we already have the ability to review all contracts now, and we do. We don't step in and manage it directly. We're aware of what's going on.
Quote from: LauraMars on September 27, 2013, 01:07:11 PM
I wonder how the non-lethal contracts will be accomplished.
If you're a maxxed burglar and a templar says "Your mission is to Deface Kadian Property" - and you sneak into their estate and trash the garden, will the imms help out and change the room description? Or do you need to rely on coded drop descs and stuff that will vanish with the next reboot?
This sounds like an area in which we can help out. Plus, breaking into the estate might be better done with staff assistance anyway so that the world can be animated properly.
Concerning the idea that an Artist may not be on at the same time as a Victim, should it be considered more... good form if an Artist is to be given a contract, to put it immediately into a Character Report (as I'm sure the Templar would have) just so staff can review it? Not that it'd be a REQUIREMENT per se, but if you can't complete a contract a RL month later and you expect staff to know why, it'd be foolhardy.
Which runs into the issue that you're sort of an "independent" that now has to inform staff of all your kills, which could get .... time consuming. If you're X-D.
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 12:20:13 PMJust like an artist would have to do their job, a templar would have to do their job--which means making the system work. Sure, they might HAVE IC biases. Acting on them by manipulating this brokerage system would be foolhardy. Acting on those in other ways sounds more reasonable.
Foolhardy it might be, but far beyond the realm of impossibility. Templars are frequently corrupt, in-character, I think this is something we can share in an open discussion that involves them. It goes back to absolute power corrupting absolutely. By documentation and public perception they might be paragons of virtue, but both from an IC and OOC standpoint that myth can't be made real. A Templar would have to be played a robot in order to remain unbias, be that IC or OOC, as a player or staff. The difference is in the South this is commonly accepted, whereas in the North it hides behind a veneer of virtue.
Justifying biased actions through convenient ruses is one of the things Templars excel in, especially in the North where there's a facade to be maintained. I hardly think it's a stretch to consider the very plausible abuse of this system by a Templar, when they only have staff to answer to and can devise IC justifications for their actions on a whim. That's also not something I feel can or will change, but I do think it can be taken under consideration when trying to fool-proof a new system being implemented.
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 12:20:13 PMWe brought this up in the first place and here's why we disagreed on it... [snip] First, it'd need at LEAST a templar to do the contract in the first place. Second, if a templar in Tuluk wants another templar in Tuluk dead, that sounds like a plot ripe for some discussion with staff so we can figure out whether this makes sense or not.
A contract of any sort, be it assassination, theft, or otherwise, would certainly need that. And I included that in my statement as well, as presented. I'm not arguing that anyone other than a Templar should be able to put out a contract on another Templar, but I am arguing that at least that much should be open to the system. Templars are above the law, but should not be above the political machinations of other Templars. It's the only thing that can keep them in check, from an IC standpoint, outside of the long arm of staff.
As for a Templar wishing another Templar dead, or stolen from, or defamed in other ways... It's clearly not beyond the realm of possibility. It never has been, and recent public events clearly illustrate it remains to be the case. Should it be common or frequent? Of course not. But the possibility should be there, and when we're writing things in stone it's a good time to consider that.
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 12:20:13 PMMaybe it can be loosened up in the future, but as stated above and earlier, making it fast and loose now might spell trouble for those wishing to find the holes in the system that were NOT intended to be there.
I think we're simply coming at it from opposite ends. I see the current system in place, the one in place for the past decade or so, as fast and loose and full of loop holes. Abuse of power has occurred repeatedly in many player's eyes, over the years. It's not a topic I'd like to open because I know where it will lead. But my point here is, making Templars liable for their actions and susceptible to the very system they're sworn to uphold, is a small step towards ensuring that abuse is minimized to some extent. The only reason to keep this as it stands, is to continue to protect certain roles from being held accountable to their actions and the environment around them. In those instances, when those roles become so crucial that losing the character would have game-wide effects, the roles should be in the hands of NPC and not PC. No sponsored role should ever be offered to players if the game or staff can't adjust to their loss. And unfortunately such roles have and still do exist in the game.
QuoteActually Rathustra hit on a fun idea of having a confession-booth style thing. I never really thought of it being its own script-worthy event where someone goes in, writes on a board, then leaves, and it goes to staff, but...hmm... Would that really get rid of the appearance of bias? Maybe...but would it increase staff work? Yep...we'd have to review these cases ourselves or sub it out to templar PCs, which would be defeating the purpose anyway.
I think Rathustra's idea is spot on, minus that being subb'ed to Templars of course. Reviewing contracts is already bound to happen since each contract would likely find itself in several player reports, be it from the artist, the agent, or the broker in question. So being "subjected" let's say to these is unavoidable. Which only leaves the simple act of any one of our talented storytellers to animate an NPC and Way or meet the artist in question.
And while I agree that it would increase the workload on staff to some extent, keeping in mind obviously that contracts won't be set forth on a daily basis by every player in the north... I can live with that, as should any staff member who's made the decision to volunteer their time. Ensuring a fair system is in play is one of the key aspects staff is here for, and why they're offered the power to act as judge, jury and executioners when players misstep. Personally I would have no issues with a contract taking a few days longer to see it executed, if I knew that bias was limited through this system. If nothing else, this system would actually ensure even an off-peak player has a chance at setting forth or taking on a contract, without having to track down whatever the current Templar PCs might be.
Quote from: ShaLeah on September 27, 2013, 01:22:42 PM1) I really hate that you can't put a hit out on someone socially above you or Templars. Like hate it. It means that in the land of the Sun King you'll have to break his precious law to do so, which means you'll never get a shadow artist -to- do it, which means you'll have to resort to finding people outside Tuluk to do your dirty work. How realistic is that for a notoriously racist, heretic society? To have to go elsewhere? What's to stop that"patron" from snitching on the one who wants to kill the higher caste victim. For shame! So I, as a shadow artist am gonna go with my "patron" and say "Yes, Lady Templar, I'd like to purchase a contract on YOU. Oh yes, thank you for the fast approval! Do pick someone who'll actually -get- you, or do I take my half back now?". Oh no, cause "Templars are exempt as contracted targets.". This is hugely unfair to the game world and it makes templars as untouchable as fucking Tek and Utep themselves in Tuluk. Ridiculous.
I actually like that social status is a factor. It makes the Tuluki caste system, patronage, and a number of other things more relevant which
should be relevant. Tuluk is
very much about social standing, and the proposed system reinforces that. I don't know what to say about the fact that Templars can't be targets, however.
Quote2) How are these Templars supposed to know if the prospect is worthy? Set them to task BEFORE getting inked? Have them, egads, break their own laws?!?!? Jeepers!
Well, I'd assume you'd ink them, give them easy jobs to start with, and then if they fail horribly you take back the ink. Since the templars decide who gets what job anyway, it's not like you're immediately trusting them with super assassin plans (or super not-assassin plans).
Quote3) Finding a Templar to take out a contract is like finding a frigid gypsy. Let's hope the new one order, under the Sun King, indivisible with the illusion of liberty and "justice" for all (unless the person you're trying/wanting to kill is the templar that killed your sister, in which case, you're shit out of luck) proves better for those people having a hard time getting in touch with an agent.
Are we forbidding Templars from killing anyone then? Course we're not.
Uh... So the complaint here is not being able to find templars? Or the complaint is that you can't kill templars? The first is probably not as much of an issue as you think, and as to the second, you already mentioned it.
Quote4) Failure to complete a contract appropriately may result in punishment ranging from simple fines to revocation of registration to outright disappearance. - So are we now putting on a time limit on contracts? What happens if your target doesn't log in for a month (cause the player is fighting a war in Afghanistan) is staff gonna be telling these templar players/artist players/contracting players that the OOC reasons are valid and you can't kill off the one who failed?
Staff has already said that allowances need to be made for OOC issues.
+1 to what Ouroboros just said above.
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 11:32:00 AM
Quote from: janeshephard on September 27, 2013, 02:08:07 AM
Wrapping up
Talia has gone missing. It's been several weeks. The Chosen Lord has a private meeting with a Faithful Lord/Lady and mentions which contracts were fulfilled that month. He never discloses the names of who did what.
So the templarate doesn't know what's going on?
Yes. I'd rather they were kept in the dark but only stepped in to check licensing when they suspect the rules were broken, than to make them always agree to contracts. I'll be frank. I think you'll see a steep drop in artistry if they get turned into automaton that must accept every contract their offered. I think you'll see Templars avoiding contact with people who keep asking for contracts that don't suit His Faithful's political agenda.
I understand you don't like my idea, and I think it's not perfect, but it solves some of the problems in your proposed system.
Quote from: ShaLeah on September 27, 2013, 01:22:42 PM
1) I really hate that you can't put a hit out on someone socially above you or Templars. Like hate it. It means that in the land of the Sun King you'll have to break his precious law to do so, which means you'll never get a shadow artist -to- do it, which means you'll have to resort to finding people outside Tuluk to do your dirty work. How realistic is that for a notoriously racist, heretic society? To have to go elsewhere? What's to stop that"patron" from snitching on the one who wants to kill the higher caste victim. For shame! So I, as a shadow artist am gonna go with my "patron" and say "Yes, Lady Templar, I'd like to purchase a contract on YOU. Oh yes, thank you for the fast approval! Do pick someone who'll actually -get- you, or do I take my half back now?". Oh no, cause "Templars are exempt as contracted targets.". This is hugely unfair to the game world and it makes templars as untouchable as fucking Tek and Utep themselves in Tuluk. Ridiculous.
Anyone socially above you is up for grabs if they're not a templar. You just have to get a patron that is equal or greater in rank to that person to put in the contract for you (this expands the patron/partisan relationship in Tuluk). What stopping the patron from snitching? Well, you'd probably want to go to a patron willing to actually agree with you on this point. As the docs for the agents lay out, it's a good idea to approach an agent with something juicy enough that they're willing to do this on your behalf. Culturally, there would probably be a "snitching is not good" mentality in Tuluk, but if you're not smart enough to go to a person that bills themselves as a "neutral party" willing to accept all takers on contracts...and you instead go to a patron that is buddy-buddy with your intended target...I'd say you deserve to be snitched on in that case.
(As a side note, this brings up the possibility of the permanent noble agent patron. Nobles trump pretty much everyone. Suck up to that noble and they can get you a contract on pretty much everyone. Nobles could use that to their advantage, thereby again increasing the view of a noble in the eyes of Tulukis.)
If you want to go after a templar? I've got news for you, and it might not be a newsflash or anything...but if you want to
kill a templar, why do you care about the rules of this system? You're already bucking the "rules" by wanting a templar dead; how you choose to make that happen at that point probably isn't going to consider the intricacies of Tuluk's shadow artist system. Just like people that kill templars as Allanaki citizens typically don't get to hang out in Allanak afterwards, you can probably bet on the fact that killing a templar as a Tuluki citizen isn't going to typically leave you with a city retirement.
Quote2) How are these Templars supposed to know if the prospect is worthy? Set them to task BEFORE getting inked? Have them, egads, break their own laws?!?!? Jeepers!
No, it's basically a way for templars to have an out if a person wants to be an artist but you know they are a blabbermouth, too newbie-ish, or otherwise unfit for the job in that regard.
Quote3) Finding a Templar to take out a contract is like finding a frigid gypsy. Let's hope the new one order, under the Sun King, indivisible with the illusion of liberty and "justice" for all (unless the person you're trying/wanting to kill is the templar that killed your sister, in which case, you're shit out of luck) proves better for those people having a hard time getting in touch with an agent.
I've gone over this somewhere else, but redundancy is one of the large reasons we had OOC reasons for removing both Orders: because you had to go to a templar in one order to get contracts done. Now you go to any templar. We have 3 PC templars. That triples your chances.
QuoteAre we forbidding Templars from killing anyone then? Course we're not.
Not sure what this has to do with this system, but no, we are not forbidding templars from killing anyone.
Quote4) Failure to complete a contract appropriately may result in punishment ranging from simple fines to revocation of registration to outright disappearance. - So are we now putting on a time limit on contracts? What happens if your target doesn't log in for a month (cause the player is fighting a war in Afghanistan) is staff gonna be telling these templar players/artist players/contracting players that the OOC reasons are valid and you can't kill off the one who failed?
...yes? I mentioned that above, if there's an OOC concern, it can be dealt with by staff, there's no reason to panic.
QuoteI'm gonna stop and take a step back, maybe read everything, smoke a joint/have a drink/murder a puppy and think about this so much. All I keep thinking is, all the more reason to not play in Tuluk, and I really wanna. I really do.
You're in luck, most of your concerns with this system are handled already.
Quote from: Taven on September 27, 2013, 01:44:03 PM
Quote from: ShaLeah on September 27, 2013, 01:22:42 PM1) I really hate that you can't put a hit out on someone socially above you or Templars. Like hate it. It means that in the land of the Sun King you'll have to break his precious law to do so, which means you'll never get a shadow artist -to- do it, which means you'll have to resort to finding people outside Tuluk to do your dirty work. How realistic is that for a notoriously racist, heretic society? To have to go elsewhere? What's to stop that"patron" from snitching on the one who wants to kill the higher caste victim. For shame! So I, as a shadow artist am gonna go with my "patron" and say "Yes, Lady Templar, I'd like to purchase a contract on YOU. Oh yes, thank you for the fast approval! Do pick someone who'll actually -get- you, or do I take my half back now?". Oh no, cause "Templars are exempt as contracted targets.". This is hugely unfair to the game world and it makes templars as untouchable as fucking Tek and Utep themselves in Tuluk. Ridiculous.
I actually like that social status is a factor. It makes the Tuluki caste system, patronage, and a number of other things more relevant which should be relevant. Tuluk is very much about social standing, and the proposed system reinforces that. I don't know what to say about the fact that Templars can't be targets, however.
Quote2) How are these Templars supposed to know if the prospect is worthy? Set them to task BEFORE getting inked? Have them, egads, break their own laws?!?!? Jeepers!
Well, I'd assume you'd ink them, give them easy jobs to start with, and then if they fail horribly you take back the ink. Since the templars decide who gets what job anyway, it's not like you're immediately trusting them with super assassin plans (or super not-assassin plans).
Quote3) Finding a Templar to take out a contract is like finding a frigid gypsy. Let's hope the new one order, under the Sun King, indivisible with the illusion of liberty and "justice" for all (unless the person you're trying/wanting to kill is the templar that killed your sister, in which case, you're shit out of luck) proves better for those people having a hard time getting in touch with an agent.
Are we forbidding Templars from killing anyone then? Course we're not.
Uh... So the complaint here is not being able to find templars? Or the complaint is that you can't kill templars? The first is probably not as much of an issue as you think, and as to the second, you already mentioned it.
Quote4) Failure to complete a contract appropriately may result in punishment ranging from simple fines to revocation of registration to outright disappearance. - So are we now putting on a time limit on contracts? What happens if your target doesn't log in for a month (cause the player is fighting a war in Afghanistan) is staff gonna be telling these templar players/artist players/contracting players that the OOC reasons are valid and you can't kill off the one who failed?
Staff has already said that allowances need to be made for OOC issues.
1) Think of social climbing. You should be able to kill -anyone- above you for gain and status. Period. Anyone in your way is a target. I should be able to take a contract out on CL Winrothol to please my CL Dasari and gain favor, status, promotion. They should cost more, way more if they are above you, but NO ONE should be beyond the reach of a supposed "shadow
artist". Including Templars.
2) They're supposed to be deemed worthy before they're inked.
"Should the prospective artist be deemed worthy of handling these duties, the artist will be given a tattoo that signifies that they are a registered shadow artist." - Anyone should be able to register, the inking should either come WHEN the person is deemed worthy OR you shouldn't be inked at all. What newb shadowy artistry person isn't gonna suck? Isn't gonna be seen? Maybe they're implying that you shouldn't register until you've twinked out all your skills? I dunno. I only know it doesn't make sense for me to say I'm an ubersassin, register for it when my skills are for shit and then be penalized with death when I suck at my job. Makes for a difficult time to get any good and really REQUIRE a patron which, I'll have to leave at some point if I'm good anyway.
3) It's both, especially since you have to basically get another templar to patron you for you to be able to kill the one you wanna kill anyway... get it?
Quote from: ShaLeah on September 27, 2013, 01:22:42 PM
Oh my God. I'm not even through the first page and already I'm [self edited].
1) I really hate that you can't put a hit out on someone socially above you or Templars. Like hate it. It means that in the land of the Sun King you'll have to break his precious law to do so, which means you'll never get a shadow artist -to- do it, which means you'll have to resort to finding people outside Tuluk to do your dirty work. How realistic is that for a notoriously racist, heretic society? To have to go elsewhere? What's to stop that"patron" from snitching on the one who wants to kill the higher caste victim. For shame! So I, as a shadow artist am gonna go with my "patron" and say "Yes, Lady Templar, I'd like to purchase a contract on YOU. Oh yes, thank you for the fast approval! Do pick someone who'll actually -get- you, or do I take my half back now?". Oh no, cause "Templars are exempt as contracted targets.". This is hugely unfair to the game world and it makes templars as untouchable as fucking Tek and Utep themselves in Tuluk. Ridiculous.
You can still put a contract on a Tuluki templar. However, you'll need to find an assassin that's willing to work outside the licensed system or pay one a huge amount of money to break the rules. Obviously, there will still be assassins located in Luir's, Allanak, and Red Storm and they'll be less likely to worry too much about breaking the Tuluki system's rules.
Quote from: williamson on September 27, 2013, 02:02:46 PM
Quote from: ShaLeah on September 27, 2013, 01:22:42 PM
Oh my God. I'm not even through the first page and already I'm [self edited].
1) I really hate that you can't put a hit out on someone socially above you or Templars. Like hate it. It means that in the land of the Sun King you'll have to break his precious law to do so, which means you'll never get a shadow artist -to- do it, which means you'll have to resort to finding people outside Tuluk to do your dirty work. How realistic is that for a notoriously racist, heretic society? To have to go elsewhere? What's to stop that"patron" from snitching on the one who wants to kill the higher caste victim. For shame! So I, as a shadow artist am gonna go with my "patron" and say "Yes, Lady Templar, I'd like to purchase a contract on YOU. Oh yes, thank you for the fast approval! Do pick someone who'll actually -get- you, or do I take my half back now?". Oh no, cause "Templars are exempt as contracted targets.". This is hugely unfair to the game world and it makes templars as untouchable as fucking Tek and Utep themselves in Tuluk. Ridiculous.
You can still put a contract on a Tuluki templar. However, you'll need to find an assassin that's willing to work outside the licensed system or pay one a huge amount of money to break the rules. Obviously, there will still be assassins located in Luir's, Allanak, and Red Storm and they'll be less likely to worry too much about breaking the Tuluki system's rules.
That's my point. I don't think it's very Tuluki like to hire outside your homeland. I'd think it as a major act of treason, and isn't it all about appearances?
Quote from: ShaLeah on September 27, 2013, 02:02:29 PM1) Think of social climbing. You should be able to kill -anyone- above you for gain and status. Period. Anyone in your way is a target. I should be able to take a contract out on CL Winrothol to please my CL Dasari and gain favor, status, promotion. They should cost more, way more if they are above you, but NO ONE should be beyond the reach of a supposed "shadow artist". Including Templars.
Uh... But you can. Just have your CL Winrothol get the contract for you. If you're their partisan, they can hire you to do the killing (via templars), and reward you gloriously when you succeed.
Why should being a Shadow Artist make you have the right to kill everyone? Nobody IS above the reach of a shadow artist (excepting templars) IF someone with social standing hires said artist against someone. Again; social standing counts for a lot in Tuluk. The more respected you are and more position you have, the harder it
should be to kill you. This system allows for that by who can take out contracts.
Quote2) They're supposed to be deemed worthy before they're inked. "Should the prospective artist be deemed worthy of handling these duties, the artist will be given a tattoo that signifies that they are a registered shadow artist." - Anyone should be able to register, the inking should either come WHEN the person is deemed worthy OR you shouldn't be inked at all. What newb shadowy artistry person isn't gonna suck? Isn't gonna be seen? Maybe they're implying that you shouldn't register until you've twinked out all your skills? I dunno. I only know it doesn't make sense for me to say I'm an ubersassin, register for it when my skills are for shit and then be penalized with death when I suck at my job. Makes for a difficult time to get any good and really REQUIRE a patron which, I'll have to leave at some point if I'm good anyway.
Nyr addressed this. It's also somewhat addressed that a patron can hire you to claim you as their own for awhile (though there have also been some stated concerns if someone becomes a Master artist). Basically, their incentive to train your newbie self is getting to keep your services when you get better.
Quote3) It's both, especially since you have to basically get another templar to patron you for you to be able to kill the one you wanna kill anyway... get it?
It's both of what? Right now, templars can't be killed. If you want to have someone killed, a templar
cannot reject you unless it's for social standing issues. Which, as mentioned, have ways to address that--ways intended to build plot, it seems like.
Quote from: ShaLeah on September 27, 2013, 02:14:12 PM
Quote from: williamson on September 27, 2013, 02:02:46 PM
Quote from: ShaLeah on September 27, 2013, 01:22:42 PM
Oh my God. I'm not even through the first page and already I'm [self edited].
1) I really hate that you can't put a hit out on someone socially above you or Templars. Like hate it. It means that in the land of the Sun King you'll have to break his precious law to do so, which means you'll never get a shadow artist -to- do it, which means you'll have to resort to finding people outside Tuluk to do your dirty work. How realistic is that for a notoriously racist, heretic society? To have to go elsewhere? What's to stop that"patron" from snitching on the one who wants to kill the higher caste victim. For shame! So I, as a shadow artist am gonna go with my "patron" and say "Yes, Lady Templar, I'd like to purchase a contract on YOU. Oh yes, thank you for the fast approval! Do pick someone who'll actually -get- you, or do I take my half back now?". Oh no, cause "Templars are exempt as contracted targets.". This is hugely unfair to the game world and it makes templars as untouchable as fucking Tek and Utep themselves in Tuluk. Ridiculous.
You can still put a contract on a Tuluki templar. However, you'll need to find an assassin that's willing to work outside the licensed system or pay one a huge amount of money to break the rules. Obviously, there will still be assassins located in Luir's, Allanak, and Red Storm and they'll be less likely to worry too much about breaking the Tuluki system's rules.
That's my point. I don't think it's very Tuluki like to hire outside your homeland. I'd think it as a major act of treason, and isn't it all about appearances?
Isn't it already a major act of treason to WANT TO KILL A TEMPLAR?
I mean if I'm a respected member of northern society and I wanted to kill a Faithful, I probably don't give a flying fuck about what Muk Utep thinks of me and give way more fucks about doing the job quickly and efficiently and hoping it never leads back to me.
If I'm not a respected member of northern society and I want to kill a Faithful, I still give zero fucks about Muk Utep and am probably planning on leaving town once the job's been done.
I agree that templars ought to be off limits to the "lawful" formal criminal system in whatever shape it takes. The social caste part of who can take a hit out on who, I think, is pretty solid.
Now, should anything stop a templar from trying to recruit a really good shadow artist assassin "off the books" to take out a rival templar? No, but of course those two are fully aware of the consequences for them both if they get caught.
Quote from: Jherlen on September 27, 2013, 02:32:23 PMNow, should anything stop a templar from trying to recruit a really good shadow artist assassin "off the books" to take out a rival templar? No, but of course those two are fully aware of the consequences for them both if they get caught.
On the other hand...
I think generally, it's a lot easier to uncover murder plots in Tuluk then it is in Allanak. In Allanak, I'd have more faith that as a noble (or templar) I could arrange a templar's death and get away with it then in Tuluk. In Tuluk... I don't feel like it's an option you can really even consider. The chance of being found out seems drastically higher.
I think it's that way as-is though, I don't think the new docs change that at all.
I've read the majority of these posts and I think the new system is going to be pretty interesting. Especially, once it pans out over a few months. I'd suggest that there would be more gray area for the templars. No one has mentioned pricing. However, I hope that it's left up to the PC templars to decide. I'd hate for it to be mandated by some chart in the templar docs. For example:
If someone approaches a templar to have their important and loyal partisan assassinated (perhaps unknowingly), the templar would be free to give them a ridiculously high price for the assassination. This would clue in the buyer that the person is important to the city or at least the templar in question.
What if someone begins to regularly bribe a templar to keep themself safe? Would this be allowed to factor into their cost of their assassination?
After the successful completion of huge contracts, will there be a rule in place to prevent the templar from killing the shadow artist and keeping all the coins for themself?
I'll be looking forward to see the new system in place.
Quote from: Wish on September 27, 2013, 02:27:54 PM
Quote from: ShaLeah on September 27, 2013, 02:14:12 PM
Quote from: williamson on September 27, 2013, 02:02:46 PM
Quote from: ShaLeah on September 27, 2013, 01:22:42 PM
Oh my God. I'm not even through the first page and already I'm [self edited].
1) I really hate that you can't put a hit out on someone socially above you or Templars. Like hate it. It means that in the land of the Sun King you'll have to break his precious law to do so, which means you'll never get a shadow artist -to- do it, which means you'll have to resort to finding people outside Tuluk to do your dirty work. How realistic is that for a notoriously racist, heretic society? To have to go elsewhere? What's to stop that"patron" from snitching on the one who wants to kill the higher caste victim. For shame! So I, as a shadow artist am gonna go with my "patron" and say "Yes, Lady Templar, I'd like to purchase a contract on YOU. Oh yes, thank you for the fast approval! Do pick someone who'll actually -get- you, or do I take my half back now?". Oh no, cause "Templars are exempt as contracted targets.". This is hugely unfair to the game world and it makes templars as untouchable as fucking Tek and Utep themselves in Tuluk. Ridiculous.
You can still put a contract on a Tuluki templar. However, you'll need to find an assassin that's willing to work outside the licensed system or pay one a huge amount of money to break the rules. Obviously, there will still be assassins located in Luir's, Allanak, and Red Storm and they'll be less likely to worry too much about breaking the Tuluki system's rules.
That's my point. I don't think it's very Tuluki like to hire outside your homeland. I'd think it as a major act of treason, and isn't it all about appearances?
Isn't it already a major act of treason to WANT TO KILL A TEMPLAR?
I mean if I'm a respected member of northern society and I wanted to kill a Faithful, I probably don't give a flying fuck about what Muk Utep thinks of me and give way more fucks about doing the job quickly and efficiently and hoping it never leads back to me.
If I'm not a respected member of northern society and I want to kill a Faithful, I still give zero fucks about Muk Utep and am probably planning on leaving town once the job's been done.
Bingo
Quote from: Jherlen on September 27, 2013, 01:23:00 PM
Quote from: OnlyChicken on September 27, 2013, 02:52:56 AM
What you're asking for is the ability to perform like an independent, unaffiliated contract killer with the full rights to negotiate contracts while simultaneously working within the system and retaining all of the privilege and status of that institution. You want your cake and you wanna eat it, too, as the saying goes. I can't blame you for that, but it doesn't make you right. An oppressive city-state run by a god-King dictator is an oppressive city-state; there is no democracy, or even illusion of choice.
<snip>
If you wanna be that guy, do it, but outside of the system.
Yeah, I guess I am asking for independent contractors who want to work but don't want to be more-or-less sworn agents of the Templarate to be viable. For a thriving criminal community that has more than one dimension, I think they need to be. The thing is, what I'm asking for is already in the system today. I'm worried that by making Shadow Artistry the only viable way to be a sneaky lawful criminal in Tuluk, you're actually shutting out many other types of characters who would want to play that role, and work within a lawful system like they can today, but with different motivations.
Ok, I get where you're coming from in your discussion but you're going to have to disabuse yourself of the notion that they are sworn agents of the templarate.
They are sworn agents of the system. They do the job. The templars aren't hiring them (unless they are, which they won't know, anyway). Templars are keeping the artists in line, yes, but only as a matter of making the system work.
What you're asking for is in the system today, but it's also a system today that is underused and seemingly prone to corruption; these docs would fix that.
QuoteYou seem to want to play somebody who's cold-blooded and totally devoted to whatever jobs the templars would throw at you, and that's a cool role too, but should that really be the only role available for lawful crime in Tuluk? Let's be honest, you can play that same cold-blooded devotee in Allanak, with a templar's backing, and it'd be pretty much the same in practice. Tuluk has just set up more formality around it, but hasn't expanded the area of the game. I'd like to see it expanded.
I kinda have to laugh that we're discussing the intricacies of whether we have enough role depth available for people to play lawful criminals in Tuluk. Honestly, not many people are doing it, nor are they really using the current system.
QuoteYou've identified part of the problem, but I think your solution is just going to create more issues of its own. The way to encourage more lawful criminals in Tuluk is not necessarily to force those criminals to do jobs for templars. It's perhaps encouraging more ways for them to find jobs - the templars could have a hand in that, but putting all the coins in their basket raises issues that have come up across this thread.
They are
not doing jobs for templars. Templars are just brokers. They might also be the hiring agent at times but in general, they're just brokers.
QuoteQuote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 09:40:05 AM
Quote from: Jherlen on September 26, 2013, 06:58:46 PM
Since the system is double-blind, the broker has all the power in negotiating the cost and the artist. So depending who you're after and how the templar feels about it, you might get Nightshade Silentstrike the unparalleled assassin to do your contract for 200 sid (because he can't refuse anyway), or you might get charged 5000 sid for Amos the tall, muscular 0-day burglar. This is why it seems like the broker shouldn't be a political entity so that contracting agents can at least entertain an illusion of fairness and impartiality.
But again, that's an expectation that the templar is going to do that...when the rules are such that they won't, at least not at this time.
Nyr, you're talking about a lot of these problems being fixed because people will "have faith in the system", "templars have rules they will follow", "templar's won't/shouldn't do this or that", etc. Many of these scenarios are plausible ICly, under the system we've seen so far. It's a shame to shut them down because of documentorial fiat. What we haven't seen is a compelling incentive why templars will want to enforce the system fairly. What do they, personally, gain from it? Or are we admitting Tuluk is a culture where templars aren't motivated by personal/political gain?
If they enforce a fair system, more people use it, they get more contracts.
More contracts = more money.
Also, conveniently, they have NSA-like fingers in the goings-on of the city-state, and having a forced information network is useful.
QuotePart of what makes a templar scary is that by and large, there are no rules around what they can do to the average Commoner Amos. They have to face consequences for their actions, but I think it's a huge loss if we tell people that they can just trust templars won't screw them over because they have this abstract system defined by documentation to uphold. I want templars to be corrupt and screw people over. I want them to have internal struggles and fight each other and try desperately to foil each other's plans, ruin their contracts, etc. That all goes out the window if we start placing constraints that they have to adjucate things like this fairly. Words like "fair" and "rules" and words like "templar" should not go hand in hand.
Templars won't screw you over with
this system.
They will screw you over every other way. This is their meal ticket (or if not their meal ticket--since they get taxes coming in--it is certainly a tidy bit of money it can make them). You don't cut off the hand that feeds you. Also, this is Tuluk. Words like "fair" and "rules" and "templar" can and do go hand in hand because words like "Hlum" and "utterly destroyed" and "never existed" go hand in hand, and can't be spoken. It's not impossible to hold two conflicting ideas in mind at the same time, and it's not impossible for a corrupt government to have one area deemed above corruption and yet be corrupt itself.
You want people to ruin contracts and stuff. You can't have that without contracts to ruin in the first place. Maybe if/when this takes off we can make changes in this area...but until then, I don't think we're going to agree on this point.
QuoteTuluk needs a system where crime can be considered lawful, where PCs are able to find other PCs to commit crimes for them, where lawful-criminal PCs can have incentive to work within the system while still being self-serving, and where the templarate can tacitly approve of such activities without templars needing to get their hands dirty administering all of them, at the expense of their own interests. I think that's achievable! I just think this system needs to be iterated on to get there. I think the gaps can be closed by removing some of the rigid "this always is how things go" language, rather than by demanding the IC and OOC trust of people involved that the system will Always Work.
Like I said, we're probably going to start with the rigid language to enforce the mindset first, then relax if needed--or as needed--as time goes on. Things might change, but this probably isn't one of those things.
Quote from: Riev on September 27, 2013, 01:35:09 PM
Concerning the idea that an Artist may not be on at the same time as a Victim, should it be considered more... good form if an Artist is to be given a contract, to put it immediately into a Character Report (as I'm sure the Templar would have) just so staff can review it? Not that it'd be a REQUIREMENT per se, but if you can't complete a contract a RL month later and you expect staff to know why, it'd be foolhardy.
Which runs into the issue that you're sort of an "independent" that now has to inform staff of all your kills, which could get .... time consuming. If you're X-D.
We could do that, or we could just say that if you're having a problem with a contract from any angle, just put in a request. That might be easier and removes any need for artist players to do extra work.
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 02:01:04 PMIf you want to go after a templar? I've got news for you, and it might not be a newsflash or anything...but if you want to kill a templar, why do you care about the rules of this system? You're already bucking the "rules" by wanting a templar dead; how you choose to make that happen at that point probably isn't going to consider the intricacies of Tuluk's shadow artist system. Just like people that kill templars as Allanaki citizens typically don't get to hang out in Allanak afterwards, you can probably bet on the fact that killing a templar as a Tuluki citizen isn't going to typically leave you with a city retirement.
I'd hazard to guess because if you want to kill a Templar through this system, you're already playing a Templar and care about the system deeply. Or those who approached you for patronage on this do. How one goes about such a thing is exactly what separates the North from the South. The "why's" of such a scenario are always the same, everywhere. It's the "how's" that separate true-inked loyalists from southron barbarians.
While yes, anyone can
theoretically kill a Templar, that's not what this discussion's about. Anyone can be gotten to, assuming the simple fact that staff's willing to permit it. Resurrections clearly state what happens when that isn't the case. However this is about how this ties into Tuluki culture. One can be a Northern loyalist and still wish to see a specific Templar dead.
You seem to be focusing on the polished, ivory-carved veneer of the culture you're trying to renovate, and ignoring the maggot-ridden mass of murder, corruption and betrayal that lies beneath it. The North is civilized, but far more brutal than the South is, beneath that. Ask any player that's tried to "buck the system" in the North and they'll be happy to share their experiences.
Let me shine a different light on this... Historically examine the number of Southern Templars that have died to PK's (and not been resurrected) against those of Northern Templars. You might then see why the North needs a way for this to happen, within its culture and documentation. This system doesn't open the floodgates to the death of Northern Templars, but at least it can offer a slim chance at a semblance of balance, in a documented and structured system that staff can oversee properly.
And at the end of the day, what's the worse that can happen? A lack of eternal, ever-present and omnipotent Templars in the North? The South seems to have done just fine with its Templars being rotated now and then, I'm sure the North could survive the loss of an occasional Templar. In fact, I'd go as far as to say some regular rotation would do the North more good than harm. In my experience many sponsored roles go stale after a few RL years, and need to be taken out before they spoil. The higher the position, the more lethal the stink, when that happens.
Quote from: Ouroboros on September 27, 2013, 01:41:20 PM
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 12:20:13 PMJust like an artist would have to do their job, a templar would have to do their job--which means making the system work. Sure, they might HAVE IC biases. Acting on them by manipulating this brokerage system would be foolhardy. Acting on those in other ways sounds more reasonable.
Foolhardy it might be, but far beyond the realm of impossibility. Templars are frequently corrupt, in-character, I think this is something we can share in an open discussion that involves them. It goes back to absolute power corrupting absolutely. By documentation and public perception they might be paragons of virtue, but both from an IC and OOC standpoint that myth can't be made real. A Templar would have to be played a robot in order to remain unbias, be that IC or OOC, as a player or staff. The difference is in the South this is commonly accepted, whereas in the North it hides behind a veneer of virtue.
Justifying biased actions through convenient ruses is one of the things Templars excel in, especially in the North where there's a facade to be maintained. I hardly think it's a stretch to consider the very plausible abuse of this system by a Templar, when they only have staff to answer to and can devise IC justifications for their actions on a whim. That's also not something I feel can or will change, but I do think it can be taken under consideration when trying to fool-proof a new system being implemented.
So are you saying you want this system to be biased and allow templars to abuse it in ways they see fit? I'm not saying that's a bad thing or an intended thing or whatever, just trying to understand your intent.
Quote
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 12:20:13 PMWe brought this up in the first place and here's why we disagreed on it... [snip] First, it'd need at LEAST a templar to do the contract in the first place. Second, if a templar in Tuluk wants another templar in Tuluk dead, that sounds like a plot ripe for some discussion with staff so we can figure out whether this makes sense or not.
A contract of any sort, be it assassination, theft, or otherwise, would certainly need that. And I included that in my statement as well, as presented. I'm not arguing that anyone other than a Templar should be able to put out a contract on another Templar, but I am arguing that at least that much should be open to the system. Templars are above the law, but should not be above the political machinations of other Templars. It's the only thing that can keep them in check, from an IC standpoint, outside of the long arm of staff.
As for a Templar wishing another Templar dead, or stolen from, or defamed in other ways... It's clearly not beyond the realm of possibility. It never has been, and recent public events clearly illustrate it remains to be the case. Should it be common or frequent? Of course not. But the possibility should be there, and when we're writing things in stone it's a good time to consider that.
If a templar wants to kill another templar in their same city-state, we'd like to know about it. It's not beyond the realm of possibility, no, but when this sort of thing occurs, on an OOC level, it's nice to know on a staff level so we can both be aware and decide the potential reaction of the templarate to such a thing--whether it fails or succeeds. It helps us get prepared for either possibility as well.
Quote
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 12:20:13 PMMaybe it can be loosened up in the future, but as stated above and earlier, making it fast and loose now might spell trouble for those wishing to find the holes in the system that were NOT intended to be there.
I think we're simply coming at it from opposite ends. I see the current system in place, the one in place for the past decade or so, as fast and loose and full of loop holes. Abuse of power has occurred repeatedly in many player's eyes, over the years. It's not a topic I'd like to open because I know where it will lead. But my point here is, making Templars liable for their actions and susceptible to the very system they're sworn to uphold, is a small step towards ensuring that abuse is minimized to some extent. The only reason to keep this as it stands, is to continue to protect certain roles from being held accountable to their actions and the environment around them. In those instances, when those roles become so crucial that losing the character would have game-wide effects, the roles should be in the hands of NPC and not PC. No sponsored role should ever be offered to players if the game or staff can't adjust to their loss. And unfortunately such roles have and still do exist in the game.
So now...we want to keep from having it abused by templars?
I'm not following you. :(
QuoteActually Rathustra hit on a fun idea of having a confession-booth style thing. I never really thought of it being its own script-worthy event where someone goes in, writes on a board, then leaves, and it goes to staff, but...hmm... Would that really get rid of the appearance of bias? Maybe...but would it increase staff work? Yep...we'd have to review these cases ourselves or sub it out to templar PCs, which would be defeating the purpose anyway.
I think Rathustra's idea is spot on, minus that being subb'ed to Templars of course. Reviewing contracts is already bound to happen since each contract would likely find itself in several player reports, be it from the artist, the agent, or the broker in question. So being "subjected" let's say to these is unavoidable. Which only leaves the simple act of any one of our talented storytellers to animate an NPC and Way or meet the artist in question.[/quote]
We are not going to do this. It'll come up normally as it does already.
Quote
And while I agree that it would increase the workload on staff to some extent, keeping in mind obviously that contracts won't be set forth on a daily basis by every player in the north... I can live with that, as should any staff member who's made the decision to volunteer their time. Ensuring a fair system is in play is one of the key aspects staff is here for, and why they're offered the power to act as judge, jury and executioners when players misstep. Personally I would have no issues with a contract taking a few days longer to see it executed, if I knew that bias was limited through this system. If nothing else, this system would actually ensure even an off-peak player has a chance at setting forth or taking on a contract, without having to track down whatever the current Templar PCs might be.
Speaking as a staff member, I can't live with that and won't. I'm not increasing the workload of the Tuluki team just to satisfy players that feel an IC system is biased. The idea of a lot of these things are to improve with an eye towards simplifying when possible or just documenting it better so that it can remain in player hands. Putting it in staff hands and increasing staff workload is not part of the deal. If an off-peak player needs a contract and seriously cannot find a templar (even one that is also off-peak), then they can contact staff like they already do.
Quote from: janeshephard on September 27, 2013, 01:56:21 PM
Yes. I'd rather they were kept in the dark but only stepped in to check licensing when they suspect the rules were broken, than to make them always agree to contracts. I'll be frank. I think you'll see a steep drop in artistry if they get turned into automaton that must accept every contract their offered.
I'll be frank, too...I doubt that it can get much lower or less utilized than it is now. I'm willing to accept that if that turns out to be the case and adjust it farther down the road.
Quote from: ShaLeah on September 27, 2013, 02:02:29 PM
1) Think of social climbing. You should be able to kill -anyone- above you for gain and status. Period. Anyone in your way is a target. I should be able to take a contract out on CL Winrothol to please my CL Dasari and gain favor, status, promotion. They should cost more, way more if they are above you, but NO ONE should be beyond the reach of a supposed "shadow artist". Including Templars.
You can kill anyone you want. You just can't kill anyone you want legally, in Tuluk, unless you have the right social status or are the partisan of someone with the right social status who is then putting in a contract on your behalf. That's Tuluk, social status, period, and makes it different from Allanak even more. It creates more reasons for independents to find patronage. It creates more reasons for interaction.
Quote2) They're supposed to be deemed worthy before they're inked. "Should the prospective artist be deemed worthy of handling these duties, the artist will be given a tattoo that signifies that they are a registered shadow artist." - Anyone should be able to register, the inking should either come WHEN the person is deemed worthy OR you shouldn't be inked at all. What newb shadowy artistry person isn't gonna suck? Isn't gonna be seen? Maybe they're implying that you shouldn't register until you've twinked out all your skills? I dunno. I only know it doesn't make sense for me to say I'm an ubersassin, register for it when my skills are for shit and then be penalized with death when I suck at my job. Makes for a difficult time to get any good and really REQUIRE a patron which, I'll have to leave at some point if I'm good anyway.
I'll be honest, there are some PCs that I would not register as a shadow artist. We're talking about IC reasons here and nothing more. Someone that is a known blabbermouth is not going to be good artist material and should not be inked.
Quote3) It's both, especially since you have to basically get another templar to patron you for you to be able to kill the one you wanna kill anyway... get it?
Get with me when you want to kill a northern templar and have good reason for it and are also playing a Tuluki; we'll go from there on the issues. :)
Quote from: ShaLeah on September 27, 2013, 02:14:12 PM
Quote from: williamson on September 27, 2013, 02:02:46 PM
Quote from: ShaLeah on September 27, 2013, 01:22:42 PM
Oh my God. I'm not even through the first page and already I'm [self edited].
1) I really hate that you can't put a hit out on someone socially above you or Templars. Like hate it. It means that in the land of the Sun King you'll have to break his precious law to do so, which means you'll never get a shadow artist -to- do it, which means you'll have to resort to finding people outside Tuluk to do your dirty work. How realistic is that for a notoriously racist, heretic society? To have to go elsewhere? What's to stop that"patron" from snitching on the one who wants to kill the higher caste victim. For shame! So I, as a shadow artist am gonna go with my "patron" and say "Yes, Lady Templar, I'd like to purchase a contract on YOU. Oh yes, thank you for the fast approval! Do pick someone who'll actually -get- you, or do I take my half back now?". Oh no, cause "Templars are exempt as contracted targets.". This is hugely unfair to the game world and it makes templars as untouchable as fucking Tek and Utep themselves in Tuluk. Ridiculous.
You can still put a contract on a Tuluki templar. However, you'll need to find an assassin that's willing to work outside the licensed system or pay one a huge amount of money to break the rules. Obviously, there will still be assassins located in Luir's, Allanak, and Red Storm and they'll be less likely to worry too much about breaking the Tuluki system's rules.
That's my point. I don't think it's very Tuluki like to hire outside your homeland. I'd think it as a major act of treason, and isn't it all about appearances?
uh
you're trying to kill a templar
isn't
that a major act of treason?
Quote from: Wish on September 27, 2013, 02:27:54 PM
Quote from: ShaLeah on September 27, 2013, 02:14:12 PM
That's my point. I don't think it's very Tuluki like to hire outside your homeland. I'd think it as a major act of treason, and isn't it all about appearances?
Isn't it already a major act of treason to WANT TO KILL A TEMPLAR?
I mean if I'm a respected member of northern society and I wanted to kill a Faithful, I probably don't give a flying fuck about what Muk Utep thinks of me and give way more fucks about doing the job quickly and efficiently and hoping it never leads back to me.
If I'm not a respected member of northern society and I want to kill a Faithful, I still give zero fucks about Muk Utep and am probably planning on leaving town once the job's been done.
lol, yeah, that's kinda what I was thinking here...
Quote from: Jherlen on September 27, 2013, 02:32:23 PM
I agree that templars ought to be off limits to the "lawful" formal criminal system in whatever shape it takes. The social caste part of who can take a hit out on who, I think, is pretty solid.
Now, should anything stop a templar from trying to recruit a really good shadow artist assassin "off the books" to take out a rival templar? No, but of course those two are fully aware of the consequences for them both if they get caught.
Well they're aware there are consequences, maybe not exactly what they are, though...*puts a pin in that one too*
Quote from: williamson on September 27, 2013, 02:39:16 PM
I've read the majority of these posts and I think the new system is going to be pretty interesting. Especially, once it pans out over a few months. I'd suggest that there would be more gray area for the templars. No one has mentioned pricing. However, I hope that it's left up to the PC templars to decide. I'd hate for it to be mandated by some chart in the templar docs. For example:
If someone approaches a templar to have their important and loyal partisan assassinated (perhaps unknowingly), the templar would be free to give them a ridiculously high price for the assassination. This would clue in the buyer that the person is important to the city or at least the templar in question.
What if someone begins to regularly bribe a templar to keep themself safe? Would this be allowed to factor into their cost of their assassination?
After the successful completion of huge contracts, will there be a rule in place to prevent the templar from killing the shadow artist and keeping all the coins for themself?
I'll be looking forward to see the new system in place.
These are also interesting points that might need to come up in docs as well so as to flesh out some of these "sharp edges" that some folk seem not so cool with :)
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 02:51:15 PM
What you're asking for is in the system today, but it's also a system today that is underused and seemingly prone to corruption; these docs would fix that.
You know better than we do how well the system gets used. So certainly, we can try and tweak the system to eliminate underuse. But does this go overboard? Are shadow artists, or players who would potentially play them, really looking for a system to be set up that seems to force them into taking jobs, or do they just want jobs to be easier to find and consider? Your other point, about the system being prone to corruption, sounds
GREAT. Why do we want it to be less corrupt?
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 09:40:05 AM
Quote from: Jherlen on September 26, 2013, 06:58:46 PM
Nyr, you're talking about a lot of these problems being fixed because people will "have faith in the system", "templars have rules they will follow", "templar's won't/shouldn't do this or that", etc. Many of these scenarios are plausible ICly, under the system we've seen so far. It's a shame to shut them down because of documentorial fiat. What we haven't seen is a compelling incentive why templars will want to enforce the system fairly. What do they, personally, gain from it? Or are we admitting Tuluk is a culture where templars aren't motivated by personal/political gain?
If they enforce a fair system, more people use it, they get more contracts.
More contracts = more money.
Also, conveniently, they have NSA-like fingers in the goings-on of the city-state, and having a forced information network is useful.
So enforcing the system fairly (against yourself) = potential of more contracts down the road. But enforcing the system fairly against yourself also = certainty that your assets are going to be harmed, plans disrupted, etc. Is a bird in the hand really not worth (potentially, later) two in the bush to
every Tuluki templar? If given the certainty of immediate pain for possible future financial gain, I don't think we can categorically expect every templar to want to shoot themselves in their own foot in every situation. The potential for corruption is there, as it should be. Unfortunately that corruption would undermine trust in the system, and then no one would use it. It goes back to what I said back on page 2 or 3 about expecting templars to act against their own best interest. It just doesn't make sense to me.
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 09:40:05 AM
Templars won't screw you over with this system. They will screw you over every other way. This is their meal ticket (or if not their meal ticket--since they get taxes coming in--it is certainly a tidy bit of money it can make them). You don't cut off the hand that feeds you.
It wouldn't even take a mildly clever templar to figure out how to exploit the "meal ticket" part of the system while also neutering it against his interests. Tulukis are not too dumb to figure that out. And the presumption has to be that if a templar
can do something in his own best interests (not the City's, not the Templarate's, his own), he
will. It would seem that if you wanted to take a contract out on someone, you had better be damn certain the Faithful you approach wants the same things you do. This just doesn't seem like something the whole city will take on trust.
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 09:40:05 AM
Also, this is Tuluk. Words like "fair" and "rules" and "templar" can and do go hand in hand because words like "Hlum" and "utterly destroyed" and "never existed" go hand in hand, and can't be spoken. It's not impossible to hold two conflicting ideas in mind at the same time, and it's not impossible for a corrupt government to have one area deemed above corruption and yet be corrupt itself.
ICly, in terms of propaganda, yes. But in terms of the game, OOCly? I just don't buy that we should be forcing templars to be fair and follow some rules just so documentation "works". And like I said, ICly NOT in terms of propaganda, I don't buy templars would have the incentive to make their hands actually match their mouths behind the scenes.
This system can still work, but maybe it requires some sort of new role to broker the contracts so that PC templars can go on being the corrupt conniving assholes we all want them to be. A merchant house, a special type of bard, a self-run Shadow Artist's Guild , or some other Arbiter in Tuluk that is indirectly managed by the templarate, but has a charter of staying neutral, staying out of political affairs, and ensuring just that contracts are brokered fairly and violations of the process are punished severely. Such an entity could easily sprout up, and if it did indeed stay neutral, would have a much easier time commanding the trust of everyone involved. I'd not only love to play a Shadow Artist then, I'd love to
be the guy brokering the deals.
I really hope you'll consider all this feedback and give these ideas and others some serious thought. I'm going to back out of this thread until we can see a new round of Beta docs for public comment. Thanks for all you've shared. :)
Quote from: Ouroboros on September 27, 2013, 03:02:03 PM
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 02:01:04 PMIf you want to go after a templar? I've got news for you, and it might not be a newsflash or anything...but if you want to kill a templar, why do you care about the rules of this system? You're already bucking the "rules" by wanting a templar dead; how you choose to make that happen at that point probably isn't going to consider the intricacies of Tuluk's shadow artist system. Just like people that kill templars as Allanaki citizens typically don't get to hang out in Allanak afterwards, you can probably bet on the fact that killing a templar as a Tuluki citizen isn't going to typically leave you with a city retirement.
I'd hazard to guess because if you want to kill a Templar through this system, you're already playing a Templar and care about the system deeply. Or those who approached you for patronage on this do. How one goes about such a thing is exactly what separates the North from the South. The "why's" of such a scenario are always the same, everywhere. It's the "how's" that separate true-inked loyalists from southron barbarians.
While yes, anyone can theoretically kill a Templar, that's not what this discussion's about. Anyone can be gotten to, assuming the simple fact that staff's willing to permit it. Resurrections clearly state what happens when that isn't the case. However this is about how this ties into Tuluki culture. One can be a Northern loyalist and still wish to see a specific Templar dead.
You seem to be focusing on the polished, ivory-carved veneer of the culture you're trying to renovate, and ignoring the maggot-ridden mass of murder, corruption and betrayal that lies beneath it. The North is civilized, but far more brutal than the South is, beneath that. Ask any player that's tried to "buck the system" in the North and they'll be happy to share their experiences.
I think if you want to kill a templar in Tuluk and you're a templar, you have ways of doing that and if you want to do that, you should talk to your staff, who are more than happy to discuss it with you!
QuoteLet me shine a different light on this... Historically examine the number of Southern Templars that have died to PK's (and not been resurrected) against those of Northern Templars.
Okay, cool, I can do this!
There have been 11 templar PCs that have died since 2010.
Of those 11 PCs, 7 were Tuluki templars.
Of those 7, 5 died to PK, 2 others to NPCs.
Of the 4 Allanaki Templars, 2 died to PK.
QuoteYou might then see why the North needs a way for this to happen, within its culture and documentation. This system doesn't open the floodgates to the death of Northern Templars, but at least it can offer a slim chance at a semblance of balance, in a documented and structured system that staff can oversee properly.
And at the end of the day, what's the worse that can happen? A lack of eternal, ever-present and omnipotent Templars in the North? The South seems to have done just fine with its Templars being rotated now and then, I'm sure the North could survive the loss of an occasional Templar. In fact, I'd go as far as to say some regular rotation would do the North more good than harm. In my experience many sponsored roles go stale after a few RL years, and need to be taken out before they spoil. The higher the position, the more lethal the stink, when that happens.
I think what I see is that we need to kill more Allanaki templars. Hop to it!
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 03:04:39 PMSo are you saying you want this system to be biased and allow templars to abuse it in ways they see fit? I'm not saying that's a bad thing or an intended thing or whatever, just trying to understand your intent.
No, what I'm saying is that we can accept that players are biased as a whole, and instead of pretending it isn't the case, recognize it, minimize it where we can, and balance it where we can't so that at least the playing field is level from an OOC standpoint.
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 12:20:13 PMIf a templar wants to kill another templar in their same city-state, we'd like to know about it. It's not beyond the realm of possibility, no, but when this sort of thing occurs, on an OOC level, it's nice to know on a staff level so we can both be aware and decide the potential reaction of the templarate to such a thing--whether it fails or succeeds. It helps us get prepared for either possibility as well.
I'm not sure what this is in argument towards, since within this system or without it, staff would be appraised of such actions regardless. If anything, they're guaranteed to be appraised if such a hit is made through this system, than they might be otherwise. Unless you're confusing being appraised of, with approving of, I'm not sure what you meant to say with the above.
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 12:20:13 PMSo now...we want to keep from having it abused by templars? I'm not following you. :(
Neither am I, it seems. How does opening up the system to
use by Templars against Templars translate into
abuse? By that line of thought, anyone using this system is abusing it, no? I think you've mistaken two separate issues. One is that Templars shouldn't be brokers, because they
are biased and will remain so by the very nature of the roles they play. The other is that Templars shouldn't be above the system itself, among other reasons because they have no other checks and measures towards their inherent bias in the North, other than direct staff intervention.
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 12:20:13 PMWe are not going to do this. It'll come up normally as it does already.
You were the one that shared Rathustra's idea in the first place, so I assumed it was under discussion and we're not presented with things already set in stone here. No worries either way though, just clearing up why I brought it up.
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 12:20:13 PMSpeaking as a staff member, I can't live with that and won't. I'm not increasing the workload of the Tuluki team just to satisfy players that feel an IC system is biased. The idea of a lot of these things are to improve with an eye towards simplifying when possible or just documenting it better so that it can remain in player hands. Putting it in staff hands and increasing staff workload is not part of the deal. If an off-peak player needs a contract and seriously cannot find a templar (even one that is also off-peak), then they can contact staff like they already do.
If you're intent on keeping Templars as brokers, be it because your can't think of a system that doesn't increase the workload on staff or because your faith in the players you select for Northern Templars is unshakable, it only further emphasizes the need for them be not be above the system they're essentially administrating.
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 03:34:24 PMI think if you want to kill a templar in Tuluk and you're a templar, you have ways of doing that and if you want to do that, you should talk to your staff, who are more than happy to discuss it with you!
If such ways exist already, what's one more, that's actually working within the Tuluki system of assassination? Is it an issue of the method, of informing staff, or of gaining approval from staff? And what if you're not a Templar that wants to kill another Templar, but a Templar that's considering patronage of such a contract for whatever suitable benefits that might offer them?
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 03:34:24 PMOkay, cool, I can do this! There have been 11 templar PCs that have died since 2010. Of those 11 PCs, 7 were Tuluki templars. Of those 7, 5 died to PK, 2 others to NPCs. Of the 4 Allanaki Templars, 2 died to PK.
And how many of those Tuluki Templars were Lirathans? Because I should just leave this right there.
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 03:34:24 PMI think what I see is that we need to kill more Allanaki templars. Hop to it!
Oddly enough, what I get from those numbers is that there's a lot less hate towards Southern Templars from the player population. It makes one wonder why that is.
Quote from: Jherlen on September 27, 2013, 03:19:22 PM
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 02:51:15 PM
What you're asking for is in the system today, but it's also a system today that is underused and seemingly prone to corruption; these docs would fix that.
You know better than we do how well the system gets used. So certainly, we can try and tweak the system to eliminate underuse. But does this go overboard? Are shadow artists, or players who would potentially play them, really looking for a system to be set up that seems to force them into taking jobs, or do they just want jobs to be easier to find and consider? Your other point, about the system being prone to corruption, sounds GREAT. Why do we want it to be less corrupt?
It's not prone to corruption. It's "seemingly" prone to corruption. This would remove the seemingly entirely and make it not prone to corruption. Why do we want it to be less corrupt? Not sure. I just want it to be used if it's there. If it requires it to look like it's a system that works, and requires some restrictions initially, I'm all for trying it.
Quote
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 09:40:05 AM
Quote from: Jherlen on September 26, 2013, 06:58:46 PM
Nyr, you're talking about a lot of these problems being fixed because people will "have faith in the system", "templars have rules they will follow", "templar's won't/shouldn't do this or that", etc. Many of these scenarios are plausible ICly, under the system we've seen so far. It's a shame to shut them down because of documentorial fiat. What we haven't seen is a compelling incentive why templars will want to enforce the system fairly. What do they, personally, gain from it? Or are we admitting Tuluk is a culture where templars aren't motivated by personal/political gain?
If they enforce a fair system, more people use it, they get more contracts.
More contracts = more money.
Also, conveniently, they have NSA-like fingers in the goings-on of the city-state, and having a forced information network is useful.
So enforcing the system fairly (against yourself) = potential of more contracts down the road. But enforcing the system fairly against yourself also = certainty that your assets are going to be harmed, plans disrupted, etc. Is a bird in the hand really not worth (potentially, later) two in the bush to every Tuluki templar? If given the certainty of immediate pain for possible future financial gain, I don't think we can categorically expect every templar to want to shoot themselves in their own foot in every situation. The potential for corruption is there, as it should be. Unfortunately that corruption would undermine trust in the system, and then no one would use it. It goes back to what I said back on page 2 or 3 about expecting templars to act against their own best interest. It just doesn't make sense to me.
Yeah, but there's a loophole in the system for templars in the form of soldiers, so I think they'll be okay.
Quote
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 09:40:05 AM
Templars won't screw you over with this system. They will screw you over every other way. This is their meal ticket (or if not their meal ticket--since they get taxes coming in--it is certainly a tidy bit of money it can make them). You don't cut off the hand that feeds you.
It wouldn't even take a mildly clever templar to figure out how to exploit the "meal ticket" part of the system while also neutering it against his interests. Tulukis are not too dumb to figure that out. And the presumption has to be that if a templar can do something in his own best interests (not the City's, not the Templarate's, his own), he will. It would seem that if you wanted to take a contract out on someone, you had better be damn certain the Faithful you approach wants the same things you do. This just doesn't seem like something the whole city will take on trust.
Well...I guess we'll see. I'm not sure which points you're trying to make here...that it can be exploited if a templar wants to? That people just wouldn't believe that templars are handling the system neutrally? On the other hand, you're saying it should be corrupt because that's cool. Which is it?
Quote
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 09:40:05 AM
Also, this is Tuluk. Words like "fair" and "rules" and "templar" can and do go hand in hand because words like "Hlum" and "utterly destroyed" and "never existed" go hand in hand, and can't be spoken. It's not impossible to hold two conflicting ideas in mind at the same time, and it's not impossible for a corrupt government to have one area deemed above corruption and yet be corrupt itself.
ICly, in terms of propaganda, yes. But in terms of the game, OOCly? I just don't buy that we should be forcing templars to be fair and follow some rules just so documentation "works". And like I said, ICly NOT in terms of propaganda, I don't buy templars would have the incentive to make their hands actually match their mouths behind the scenes.
This system can still work, but maybe it requires some sort of new role to broker the contracts so that PC templars can go on being the corrupt conniving assholes we all want them to be. A merchant house, a special type of bard, a self-run Shadow Artist's Guild , or some other Arbiter in Tuluk that is indirectly managed by the templarate, but has a charter of staying neutral, staying out of political affairs, and ensuring just that contracts are brokered fairly and violations of the process are punished severely. Such an entity could easily sprout up, and if it did indeed stay neutral, would have a much easier time commanding the trust of everyone involved. I'd not only love to play a Shadow Artist then, I'd love to be the guy brokering the deals.
Yes, something could sprout up. But until then, I think it's possible to at least give it a shot.
Quote
I really hope you'll consider all this feedback and give these ideas and others some serious thought. I'm going to back out of this thread until we can see a new round of Beta docs for public comment. Thanks for all you've shared. :)
Definitely, thanks for chiming in, and good to see you back!
Quote from: Ouroboros on September 27, 2013, 03:02:03 PM
Let me shine a different light on this... Historically examine the number of Southern Templars that have died to PK's (and not been resurrected) against those of Northern Templars. You might then see why the North needs a way for this to happen, within its culture and documentation.
Templars are normally resurrected for what reasons?
Quote from: Ouroboros on September 27, 2013, 03:56:00 PM
No, what I'm saying is that we can accept that players are biased as a whole, and instead of pretending it isn't the case, recognize it, minimize it where we can, and balance it where we can't so that at least the playing field is level from an OOC standpoint.
I don't think we're pretending it isn't the case that players can be biased. I think we're asking that players play above that and roleplay since it's the first rule of the game. If it doesn't work or seems horrible to play, we can change it, but I'd rather give the playerbase the opportunity to
try something out that is different rather than just assume "well...this will never work because players can't handle it."
QuoteQuote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 12:20:13 PMIf a templar wants to kill another templar in their same city-state, we'd like to know about it. It's not beyond the realm of possibility, no, but when this sort of thing occurs, on an OOC level, it's nice to know on a staff level so we can both be aware and decide the potential reaction of the templarate to such a thing--whether it fails or succeeds. It helps us get prepared for either possibility as well.
I'm not sure what this is in argument towards, since within this system or without it, staff would be appraised of such actions regardless. If anything, they're guaranteed to be appraised if such a hit is made through this system, than they might be otherwise. Unless you're confusing being appraised of, with approving of, I'm not sure what you meant to say with the above.
I'm saying that if a templar wants to kill another templar, we want to know about it, and that has very little to do with a system that allows them to do that or not. Making rules that include the outliers isn't needed, I don't think.
Quote
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 12:20:13 PMSo now...we want to keep from having it abused by templars? I'm not following you. :(
Neither am I, it seems. How does opening up the system to use by Templars against Templars translate into abuse? By that line of thought, anyone using this system is abusing it, no? I think you've mistaken two separate issues. One is that Templars shouldn't be brokers, because they are biased and will remain so by the very nature of the roles they play. The other is that Templars shouldn't be above the system itself, among other reasons because they have no other checks and measures towards their inherent bias in the North, other than direct staff intervention.
You said abuse earlier...
QuoteAbuse of power has occurred repeatedly in many player's eyes, over the years. It's not a topic I'd like to open because I know where it will lead. But my point here is, making Templars liable for their actions and susceptible to the very system they're sworn to uphold, is a small step towards ensuring that abuse is minimized to some extent.
And you said that it should be kept out of templar hands...
QuoteIn those instances, when those roles become so crucial that losing the character would have game-wide effects, the roles should be in the hands of NPC and not PC.
and then you threw in this, which...not really sure what you mean here, but apparently we have roles where staff and players can't adjust to their loss:
QuoteNo sponsored role should ever be offered to players if the game or staff can't adjust to their loss. And unfortunately such roles have and still do exist in the game.
So yes, you seem concerned with abuse on one hand and allowing abuse on the other and I'm not sure what side you are taking here.
Quote
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 12:20:13 PMWe are not going to do this. It'll come up normally as it does already.
You were the one that shared Rathustra's idea in the first place, so I assumed it was under discussion and we're not presented with things already set in stone here. No worries either way though, just clearing up why I brought it up.
His idea was originally a confession-style booth unrelated to your idea. I expanded it to include your thoughts, and then pointed out how your expanded idea wouldn't be ideal because of the additional work required.
Quote
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 12:20:13 PMSpeaking as a staff member, I can't live with that and won't. I'm not increasing the workload of the Tuluki team just to satisfy players that feel an IC system is biased. The idea of a lot of these things are to improve with an eye towards simplifying when possible or just documenting it better so that it can remain in player hands. Putting it in staff hands and increasing staff workload is not part of the deal. If an off-peak player needs a contract and seriously cannot find a templar (even one that is also off-peak), then they can contact staff like they already do.
If you're intent on keeping Templars as brokers, be it because your can't think of a system that doesn't increase the workload on staff or because your faith in the players you select for Northern Templars is unshakable, it only further emphasizes the need for them be not be above the system they're essentially administrating.
Quote
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 03:34:24 PMI think if you want to kill a templar in Tuluk and you're a templar, you have ways of doing that and if you want to do that, you should talk to your staff, who are more than happy to discuss it with you!
If such ways exist already, what's one more, that's actually working within the Tuluki system of assassination? Is it an issue of the method, of informing staff, or of gaining approval from staff? And what if you're not a Templar that wants to kill another Templar, but a Templar that's considering patronage of such a contract for whatever suitable benefits that might offer them?
Quote
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 03:34:24 PMOkay, cool, I can do this! There have been 11 templar PCs that have died since 2010. Of those 11 PCs, 7 were Tuluki templars. Of those 7, 5 died to PK, 2 others to NPCs. Of the 4 Allanaki Templars, 2 died to PK.
And how many of those Tuluki Templars were Lirathans? Because I think you know as well as most everyone does in this discussion...I should just not talk about IC things.
...I see this is about more than this system and about you. Let's not go there. Moderated.
Quote
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 03:34:24 PMI think what I see is that we need to kill more Allanaki templars. Hop to it!
Oddly enough, what I get from those numbers is that there's a lot less hate towards Southern Templars from the player population. It makes one wonder why that is.
Given your opinions towards this area, erm...we probably won't be seeing eye to eye on anything related to Tuluk.
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 10:17:09 AM
Quote10 With the Shadow Artists being sub-contractors for the City-State, will there be an established "artists union" being put in place to guide new players as well as veterans learning the system?
Not sure what you mean exactly...can you elaborate?
It seems that it's going to be recognized pretty well outright that most new players will be discouraged from playing Shadow Artists, from the standpoint that they won't be deemed worthy IC'ly because of the natural stumbling blocks that come from learning the new culture outright. But having said that, there needs to be some actual system put in place where masters are put together with the less skilled, if they chose to garner the full benefit of these relationships with the City-State, for training and apprenticeships. It would also allow such artists to keep an eye on prospective rivals and talent, while "working" for the unified goal of what can only be classified as organized crime. Now is that a clan, an IC labor union, Artist's Guild, whatever? There will need to be some concessions for this to be newbie friendly, because like it or not, Tuluk is a major starting point for newbies, and there is an allure to the wording of this system that would make new players as well as curious veterans and wary old timers to want to try it out. It certainly sounds in the way it is written that the journey from newly inked apprentice to Master should be one that is a career of years, there needs to be something more in place to reward and support this.
As an aside, I have an awful time not seeing Shadow Artist and not being snarky and calling them Shartists. In a city that's all about Radiance and Light...wouldn't being an artist of shadows be very, very bad?
Quote from: Law&Order on September 27, 2013, 04:35:14 PM
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 10:17:09 AM
Quote10 With the Shadow Artists being sub-contractors for the City-State, will there be an established "artists union" being put in place to guide new players as well as veterans learning the system?
Not sure what you mean exactly...can you elaborate?
It seems that it's going to be recognized pretty well outright that most new players will be discouraged from playing Shadow Artists, from the standpoint that they won't be deemed worthy IC'ly because of the natural stumbling blocks that come from learning the new culture outright. But having said that, there needs to be some actual system put in place where masters are put together with the less skilled, if they chose to garner the full benefit of these relationships with the City-State, for training and apprenticeships. It would also allow such artists to keep an eye on prospective rivals and talent, while "working" for the unified goal of what can only be classified as organized crime. Now is that a clan, an IC labor union, Artist's Guild, whatever? There will need to be some concessions for this to be newbie friendly, because like it or not, Tuluk is a major starting point for newbies, and there is an allure to the wording of this system that would make new players as well as curious veterans and wary old timers to want to try it out. It certainly sounds in the way it is written that the journey from newly inked apprentice to Master should be one that is a career of years, there needs to be something more in place to reward and support this.
"deemed worthy" is there as an out for templars so they don't have to ink people that are obviously bad for the job. You can get a new PC inked up pretty quickly if need be already, and this system wouldn't be much different.
But a newbie-friendly thing, hrm...that's worth thinking about.
Quote
As an aside, I have an awful time not seeing Shadow Artist and not being snarky and calling them Shartists. In a city that's all about Radiance and Light...wouldn't being an artist of shadows be very, very bad?
ha! Shartists. I like it.
In a city that's all about Radiance and Light, Utep is the Radiant one, so that means every person casts a shadow, and the artist is the one that works within that shadow. Or something.
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 03:14:46 PM
Quote from: Wish on September 27, 2013, 02:27:54 PM
Quote from: ShaLeah on September 27, 2013, 02:14:12 PM
That's my point. I don't think it's very Tuluki like to hire outside your homeland. I'd think it as a major act of treason, and isn't it all about appearances?
Isn't it already a major act of treason to WANT TO KILL A TEMPLAR?
I mean if I'm a respected member of northern society and I wanted to kill a Faithful, I probably don't give a flying fuck about what Muk Utep thinks of me and give way more fucks about doing the job quickly and efficiently and hoping it never leads back to me.
If I'm not a respected member of northern society and I want to kill a Faithful, I still give zero fucks about Muk Utep and am probably planning on leaving town once the job's been done.
lol, yeah, that's kinda what I was thinking here...
I'll try and bring to light some shades of grey that really allow the beholder to judge between sanctioned and not sanctioned, why, in some instances, murdering a templar might not be so treasonous, besides the OBVIOUS if they're summoned by Muk into a locked room sands their guards.
Murder: Law. the killing of another human being under conditions specifically covered in law. In the U.S., special statutory definitions include murder committed with malice aforethought, characterized by deliberation or premeditation or occurring during the commission of another serious crime, as robbery or arson (first-degree murder) and murder by intent but without deliberation or premeditation (second-degree murder)
Murder bad, right? Except in Tuluk, where murder is an art and where the only thing that makes it bad is a set of laws set forth by the Sun King. The same can be said for burglaries. In Tuluk these things are sanctioned. We're on the same page, right? Good.
So what makes murdering a lawmaker treasonous? The thoughts, the act?
If a Templar wants to murder another Templar, that's treason too? How about Legion to Legion? Right, so
really the only thing that would make a Tuluki citizen treasonous is not -thinking- they hate a Templar, it's acting against it?
As a commoner who hates templar X and decide to take it upon myself to get rid of it and commit said treason, I may, being the devout Tuluki that I am, beg the Sun King for forgiveness, castigate myself for going against my King's rule and a shitload more of RP besides running away. I could also not feel treasonous at all, if that mate of mine went into the Heart with the Templar and didn't come out, I might feel justified and vindictive, and separate said Templar from the all knowing Sun King in order to keep my delusion of faithful citizen.
So yes, the act would be treasonous, but that doesn't and shouldn't go hand in hand with
-not giving a fuck- about my Godking. You want a black and white statement keeping in with the rigidity of these new and intricate nuances of shadow artistry? Plotting against the Sun King, treason. There better be a difference between THAT and anything under Him being put into the "just as bad" category.
Feeling justified and acute, poetic love for your city and His Radiance, you think:
"It's just a litttttttttttttttle treason, not like I'm plotting to kill the Sun King Himself."
I'll cede in the whole black and white they're really untouchable thought and change to a they're NOT SO entirely untouchable frame of mind, but in a land where the social classes -are- much less able to be crossed, how much would YOU be willing to risk as a favor for a commoner?
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 04:38:56 PM
Quote
As an aside, I have an awful time not seeing Shadow Artist and not being snarky and calling them Shartists. In a city that's all about Radiance and Light...wouldn't being an artist of shadows be very, very bad?
ha! Shartists. I like it.
In a city that's all about Radiance and Light, Utep is the Radiant one, so that means every person casts a shadow, and the artist is the one that works within that shadow. Or something.
Well, I personally feel like the term "shadow artist" was sort of a way of saying without saying that there's shadows in the city of light, and yes, they will kill you. A way of acknowledging the darker side of the city, but a term that's become so common-place, people don't recognize it for what it really suggests--That not only is it okay for you to be killed, Muk Utep actually has laws that support this, and His Faithful are administering the contract.
Quote from: GithMaster on September 27, 2013, 04:25:55 PM
Quote from: Ouroboros on September 27, 2013, 03:02:03 PM
Let me shine a different light on this... Historically examine the number of Southern Templars that have died to PK's (and not been resurrected) against those of Northern Templars. You might then see why the North needs a way for this to happen, within its culture and documentation.
Templars are normally resurrected for what reasons?
I don't think they generally are. Bugs and stuff is about it.
If a new player wants to be a Shadow Artist, and the Templar PC doing the registration notices that the player on the other side is new to Armageddon, it would be easy to suggest to the PC that they find patronage/employment. Increased emphasis on patronage for Shadow Artists in order to get contracts, training etc would make it easier to guide those new players along. The new, expanded documenation will hopefully make it easier to understand how these things work, for both new and old players alike.
I just read over all of the docs.
It is Durzo Blint and the Sa'Kage from Brent Weeks' Night Angel Trilogy.
The Templarate is the Sa'Kage basically for the purpose of managing the wetboys, and the shadow artists are the wetboys.
The setup is exactly the same, the social structures are almost identical, and the rules surrounding the arts of "law breaking" etc are basically the same within the organization.
A few minor differences, but basically, the same.
I like it. I love those books.
If whoever wrote these docs hasn't read The Night Angel Trilogy, I would be extremely surprised, and if you haven't, go do that, it will give you some fantastic ideas to add to what you have here already.
Please note before posting that you shouldn't reveal or event hint at some IC stuff. If you do want to discuss that IC stuff or just need to vent to staff about something, you can do that via the request tool. This is not the place to go into things like that. Just pre-empting anything that I think might be about to be posted because I can see Who's Online and about to post, and I know what I had to moderate earlier, and I want to not have to moderate more or throw out temporary bans.
Quote from: ShaLeah on September 27, 2013, 04:46:07 PMI'll cede in the whole black and white they're really untouchable thought and change to a they're NOT SO entirely untouchable frame of mind, but in a land where the social classes -are- much less able to be crossed, how much would YOU be willing to risk as a favor for a commoner?
So instead, you're arguing that a commoner should be legally allowed to kill a templar? Or am I misunderstanding?
Because I don't think some commoner should
ever be legally able to kill a templar.
As to templars killing templars, it sounds like there will be ways to do that, but that it won't be allowed for in this system, there will be other ways to pursue it (based on Nyr's posts).
Quote from: ShaLeah on September 27, 2013, 04:46:07 PM
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 03:14:46 PM
Quote from: Wish on September 27, 2013, 02:27:54 PM
Quote from: ShaLeah on September 27, 2013, 02:14:12 PM
That's my point. I don't think it's very Tuluki like to hire outside your homeland. I'd think it as a major act of treason, and isn't it all about appearances?
Isn't it already a major act of treason to WANT TO KILL A TEMPLAR?
I mean if I'm a respected member of northern society and I wanted to kill a Faithful, I probably don't give a flying fuck about what Muk Utep thinks of me and give way more fucks about doing the job quickly and efficiently and hoping it never leads back to me.
If I'm not a respected member of northern society and I want to kill a Faithful, I still give zero fucks about Muk Utep and am probably planning on leaving town once the job's been done.
lol, yeah, that's kinda what I was thinking here...
I'll try and bring to light some shades of grey that really allow the beholder to judge between sanctioned and not sanctioned, why, in some instances, murdering a templar might not be so treasonous, besides the OBVIOUS if they're summoned by Muk into a locked room sands their guards.
Murder: Law. the killing of another human being under conditions specifically covered in law. In the U.S., special statutory definitions include murder committed with malice aforethought, characterized by deliberation or premeditation or occurring during the commission of another serious crime, as robbery or arson (first-degree murder) and murder by intent but without deliberation or premeditation (second-degree murder)
Murder bad, right? Except in Tuluk, where murder is an art and where the only thing that makes it bad is a set of laws set forth by the Sun King. The same can be said for burglaries. In Tuluk these things are sanctioned. We're on the same page, right? Good.
So what makes murdering a lawmaker treasonous? The thoughts, the act?
If a Templar wants to murder another Templar, that's treason too? How about Legion to Legion? Right, so really the only thing that would make a Tuluki citizen treasonous is not -thinking- they hate a Templar, it's acting against it?
As a commoner who hates templar X and decide to take it upon myself to get rid of it and commit said treason, I may, being the devout Tuluki that I am, beg the Sun King for forgiveness, castigate myself for going against my King's rule and a shitload more of RP besides running away. I could also not feel treasonous at all, if that mate of mine went into the Heart with the Templar and didn't come out, I might feel justified and vindictive, and separate said Templar from the all knowing Sun King in order to keep my delusion of faithful citizen.
So yes, the act would be treasonous, but that doesn't and shouldn't go hand in hand with -not giving a fuck- about my Godking. You want a black and white statement keeping in with the rigidity of these new and intricate nuances of shadow artistry? Plotting against the Sun King, treason. There better be a difference between THAT and anything under Him being put into the "just as bad" category.
Feeling justified and acute, poetic love for your city and His Radiance, you think:
"It's just a litttttttttttttttle treason, not like I'm plotting to kill the Sun King Himself."
I'll cede in the whole black and white they're really untouchable thought and change to a they're NOT SO entirely untouchable frame of mind, but in a land where the social classes -are- much less able to be crossed, how much would YOU be willing to risk as a favor for a commoner?
Ok, that's true. Just because you want to kill a Faithful doesn't mean you hate the Sun King - maybe you feel like the templar you want dead is disgracing the Sun King badly, and that Muk Utep WANTS you to kill them - you're his secret vigilante or something. You are justice. You are the night.
That doesn't change the fact that it's against the law, does it? So maybe you go outside the "system" for a way to kill them, for the Greater Good.
Anyway, there's a shitload of ways to do it and to roleplay it and there's a million different possibilities. Generally speaking, I'm not going to complain that an avenue for killing templars isn't explicitly built into this "legal crime system" that is arbitrated by templars. I'd say that in most situations, going to templars about killing other templars is more or less not going to be the best plan.
Templars are the LAW. They are the ones chosen by Muk Utep personally to make sure that His Will Be Done.
In the eyes of the Templars, if you are asking to murder a Templar, then you are probably asking to murder Muk Utep himself.
No commoners or nobles should ever have the right to "legally" lay a hand on Muk Utep's Chosen Champions, since they are a representation of him, and they can do no wrong in the eyes of the law.
If someone comes up to the Templar and demands that another Templar be killed, then it is probably that Templar's duty to report you right away, disappear you, and then if your reason made any sense to them, /perhaps/ they will investigate it, or better yet, report it to a higher authority than themselves.
At least that's how I see it.
In the Sa'Kage you can not contract a wetboy to kill another one of The Nine.
The Nine are the leaders of the Sa'Kage.
Templars.
The Shinga is the leader of the Sa'Kage and leader of The Nine. For our purposes. Muk Utep.
So no, you can't contract a shadow artist to kill a Templar.
Don't argue with Brent Weeks.
Thinking about it, I actually would like a little wiggle room for templar corruption...
...in the context of them having to adhere to some reasonably detailed laws designed to set out good practice, and having to justify how they followed procedure when a contract fails to their peers or superiors.
I think it would be great for them to have to tick every item off the list in such a way that they could sabotage the contract only through decisions which they could successfully defend later. ("All right, the terms of the hit specify a journeyman artist... Amos is falling apart fast and turning to drink, and no-one's given him a contract in more than a year, but he is still a journeyman... he used to be good though, I can claim I didn't know about his decline...")
Actually breaking the secrecy of the contract and warning someone who is a target should be very serious, templar disappearance territory, though, IMO.
Also, I think it's fine to have killing templars remain illegal, and not be accessible through this system. Templars should handle templar problems within their Orders, and anyone else killing a templar should be damn well careful not to be seen with the blood on their hands.
Also, I think the discussion that's being had here, trying to examine all the angles and work out the bugs before the docs go live, is awesome. Big thanks to Nyr for engaging in such a major way.
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 04:38:56 PM
"deemed worthy" is there as an out for templars so they don't have to ink people that are obviously bad for the job. You can get a new PC inked up pretty quickly if need be already, and this system wouldn't be much different.
But a newbie-friendly thing, hrm...that's worth thinking about.
Would you consider allowing shadow artists to get inked prior to entering the game world much like you let filthy gicks get a gem in Nak?
Quote from: Taven on September 27, 2013, 04:55:03 PM
Quote from: ShaLeah on September 27, 2013, 04:46:07 PMI'll cede in the whole black and white they're really untouchable thought and change to a they're NOT SO entirely untouchable frame of mind, but in a land where the social classes -are- much less able to be crossed, how much would YOU be willing to risk as a favor for a commoner?
So instead, you're arguing that a commoner should be legally allowed to kill a templar? Or am I misunderstanding?
Because I don't think some commoner should ever be legally able to kill a templar.
As to templars killing templars, it sounds like there will be ways to do that, but that it won't be allowed for in this system, there will be other ways to pursue it (based on Nyr's posts).
Yes, I think it should be allowed, never "legal" but doable. It's not legal in Allanak, but you can still get it done. Even on the off chance if I get that Chosen to be on my side and take out a contract on a Templar, how are we guaranteed they'd take the contract to begin with? Not stop it, not just take my sid and leave me hanging. Sun King forbid there be corruption, or betrayal.
Quote from: Malken on September 27, 2013, 05:03:44 PM
Templars are the LAW. They are the ones chosen by Muk Utep personally to make sure that His Will Be Done.
In the eyes of the Templars, if you are asking to murder a Templar, then you are probably asking to murder Muk Utep himself.
No commoners or nobles should ever have the right to "legally" lay a hand on Muk Utep's Chosen Champions, since they are a representation of him, and they can do no wrong in the eyes of the law.
If someone comes up to the Templar and demands that another Templar be killed, then it is probably that Templar's duty to report you right away, disappear you, and then if your reason made any sense to them, /perhaps/ they will investigate it, or better yet, report it to a higher authority than themselves.
At least that's how I see it.
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 02:01:04 PM
(As a side note, this brings up the possibility of the permanent noble agent patron. Nobles trump pretty much everyone. Suck up to that noble and they can get you a contract on pretty much everyone. Nobles could use that to their advantage, thereby again increasing the view of a noble in the eyes of Tulukis.)
It's a lot harder to get rid of Templars in Tuluk, politically I would think it's suicide for a Chosen to take out a contract on a Templar, the other Templars would retaliate, wouldn't they?
Quote from: Wish on September 27, 2013, 05:00:59 PM
Anyway, there's a shitload of ways to do it and to roleplay it and there's a million different possibilities. Generally speaking, I'm not going to complain that an avenue for killing templars isn't explicitly built into this "legal crime system" that is arbitrated by templars. I'd say that in most situations, going to templars about killing other templars is more or less not going to be the best plan.
Templars or Chosen killing Templars is the ONLY legal way to do it in Tuluk so thus far it seems to be the best plan which is what I find unnecessarily hard, cause let's face it, if I'm a partisan to a Templar and secretly hate him/her and graduate the trust ladder to be alone and can poison the fuck, why wouldn't I? Oh yeah, cause I love my Sun King and don't wanna commit treason and can easily find a noble/templar patron to jump to my cause.
God my head hurts.
Someone needs to start their own "underground" criminal organization in the Warrens where people who don't wish to deal with the "legal" way can go and get justice done in any ways they see fit for a higher fee.
Then 15% of the 'sids made are passed on to the Templars.
You're Amos the Nobody and want to have Chosen Lord Fancypants murdered? Better way Saul.
QuoteQuote
So enforcing the system fairly (against yourself) = potential of more contracts down the road. But enforcing the system fairly against yourself also = certainty that your assets are going to be harmed, plans disrupted, etc. Is a bird in the hand really not worth (potentially, later) two in the bush to every Tuluki templar? If given the certainty of immediate pain for possible future financial gain, I don't think we can categorically expect every templar to want to shoot themselves in their own foot in every situation. The potential for corruption is there, as it should be. Unfortunately that corruption would undermine trust in the system, and then no one would use it. It goes back to what I said back on page 2 or 3 about expecting templars to act against their own best interest. It just doesn't make sense to me.
Yeah, but there's a loophole in the system for templars in the form of soldiers, so I think they'll be okay.
Aw, c'mon Nyr. You and I both know a good templar cares about more than just his soldiers. What about his partisans? A bard who wrote a really good song about him? A merchant he's been making favorable deals with? His political allies helping him with whatever scheme he's up to lately? The hot Chosen Lady he's been banging? A good templar is gonna have his fingers in so many pies he could open a bake shop, and we can't expect he'll be willing to let too many of those pies get eaten up by anyone else.
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 04:04:11 PM
Quote
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 09:40:05 AM
Templars won't screw you over with this system. They will screw you over every other way. This is their meal ticket (or if not their meal ticket--since they get taxes coming in--it is certainly a tidy bit of money it can make them). You don't cut off the hand that feeds you.
It wouldn't even take a mildly clever templar to figure out how to exploit the "meal ticket" part of the system while also neutering it against his interests. Tulukis are not too dumb to figure that out. And the presumption has to be that if a templar can do something in his own best interests (not the City's, not the Templarate's, his own), he will. It would seem that if you wanted to take a contract out on someone, you had better be damn certain the Faithful you approach wants the same things you do. This just doesn't seem like something the whole city will take on trust.
Well...I guess we'll see. I'm not sure which points you're trying to make here...that it can be exploited if a templar wants to? That people just wouldn't believe that templars are handling the system neutrally? On the other hand, you're saying it should be corrupt because that's cool. Which is it?
The point I was trying to make is that the system can be exploited, and the obviousness of that can hardly be ignored. That would lead to people believing that the templars aren't handling the system neutrally, since it's possible for them to do so with little oversight. People not trusting the system would lead to people not wanting to use the system. The only two ways around this without changing what's been documented are: 1) acknowledge templar's are going to be corrupt, and let them be, or 2) mandate Rules that the system be followed as outlined Or Else.
I don't like option 1, because I think templar corruption would end up making the system not work at all whenever it suited the templar, and I'd love to see a lawful crime element that was not subject to PC templar whims. However, I
really don't like Option 2, because in my mind imposing OOC rules to enforce fairness on a system just to try and make it work despite the underlying unfairness of Zalanthas isn't in the spirit of the game. So that's why I keep advocating for an Option 3 - take the responsibility of adjucating the system and give it to a third party, or back to the assassins themselves. I'd be happy to work on a draft of how that might look if it'd be considered at all.
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 04:34:14 PMMaking rules that include the outliers isn't needed, I don't think.
But setting forth a rule that prohibits them entirely, is?
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 04:34:14 PMSo yes, you seem concerned with abuse on one hand and allowing abuse on the other and I'm not sure what side you are taking here.
I'm concerned about abuse, period. I think we're missing each other on the effect Templar on Templar contracts would have. You seem to see that as potential abuse, whereas I see it as balance.
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 04:34:14 PM...I see this is about more than this system and about you. Let's not go there. Moderated.
Actually, it really isn't. I don't think I shared anything that isn't common knowledge, but have no issue with the moderation either way. My point stands, and I'd request you take what I say at face value instead of reading into it further than it stands. I'm not interested in going
there any more than you are, if I was, I would have through different channels.
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 04:34:14 PMGiven your opinions towards this area, erm...we probably won't be seeing eye to eye on anything related to Tuluk.
I would hope that's not the case, since the only reason I'm taking part in this discussion at all is the fact I've always enjoyed and appreciated Tuluk as a culture and society. You of all should know that, from my playing history, without my having to say it outright. The fact I care about the area is the very reason I'm concerned for its well-being, theme, balance, and enjoyability. If I didn't, I'd simply stay out of this discussion as I do with most threads of the GDB.
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 04:38:56 PM
Quote from: Law&Order on September 27, 2013, 04:35:14 PM
It seems that it's going to be recognized pretty well outright that most new players will be discouraged from playing Shadow Artists, from the standpoint that they won't be deemed worthy IC'ly because of the natural stumbling blocks that come from learning the new culture outright. But having said that, there needs to be some actual system put in place where masters are put together with the less skilled, if they chose to garner the full benefit of these relationships with the City-State, for training and apprenticeships. It would also allow such artists to keep an eye on prospective rivals and talent, while "working" for the unified goal of what can only be classified as organized crime. Now is that a clan, an IC labor union, Artist's Guild, whatever? There will need to be some concessions for this to be newbie friendly, because like it or not, Tuluk is a major starting point for newbies, and there is an allure to the wording of this system that would make new players as well as curious veterans and wary old timers to want to try it out. It certainly sounds in the way it is written that the journey from newly inked apprentice to Master should be one that is a career of years, there needs to be something more in place to reward and support this.
"deemed worthy" is there as an out for templars so they don't have to ink people that are obviously bad for the job. You can get a new PC inked up pretty quickly if need be already, and this system wouldn't be much different.
But a newbie-friendly thing, hrm...that's worth thinking about.
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 02:01:04 PM
No, it's basically a way for templars to have an out if a person wants to be an artist but you know they are a blabbermouth, too newbie-ish, or otherwise unfit for the job in that regard.
Good. I'm glad we got here. I think it's important to really balance the idea of guarding and preserving the game world, which often involves limiting new players from roles they don't have the world knowledge to handle, and being inclusive enough to let new players really dive in.
I would hate to see new players who could clearly be taught to be great shadow artists (clearly because they dive in rping their asses off and they'd done the research and they're sponges) denied another facet of the game because they haven't had enough time in.
I think that these changes would be interesting. Comments/concerns below.
On the Docs
What I don't understand from the main doc is if you can become a Shadow Artist and say "I don't do X." It's kind of addressed in the Shadow Artist FAQ subdoc with "Let them know who you are and what your areas of specialty are. This is important, as the templarate will be giving you jobs that are appropriate for your talents as well as your skill." But what does that mean? Does that mean that they can't offer you contracts outside your specialty?
In a related vein, knowing whether you can come in later and say, "BTW I'm now good at Y, put me on the list for Y too" or "I no longer do Y but I don't want to quit artisting entirely" would be a helpful addition to the main doc.
On the Discussion
I'd really enjoy seeing either (1) something like was suggested with the call/response idea earlier, giving the Shadow Artist some indication of the type of contract and allowing them to refuse, or (2) a refusal buyout. I'm much less concerned with "You want me to kill my lover?!" and a lot more concerned honest misunderstandings and mismatches.
For instance, assuming that you can give the templarate ideas of what you're willing/able to do when you register, you told Faithful Happypants when you registered that you're open to "sending messages." You're all fired up for honest to goodness back alley smack talk, but suddenly you're being approached about burglarizing Amos's apartment and leaving a dead rat in his sock drawer. Except... you have absolutely no capability to burglarize. You don't have sneaky or burglary skills, and you aren't allowed to talk about your contracts to get someone with burglary skills to help you. That wasn't the kind of message you meant! And now you know about the contract and have no capability to back out.
Sure, the liver-gnawing would make for great roleplay, but as a player I would find that extremely frustrating on an OOC level.
People seem to be missing that crime will still be possible in Tuluk outside of the shadow artist system. That's the beauty of it.
Unlicensed criminal activity is already perfectly viable in Tuluk; it's just there's simply no reason not to get your licenses because then you have leeway to do virtually anything as long as you don't go on some crazy murder rampage. The end result is there is virtually no real criminal presence in Tuluk; all of the criminals are licensed, so all of their actions are legal! This is boring.
Now, the Sun Legions and templars will actually have something to do: they actually need to watch for common crimes, because even a licensed PC no longer has the freedom to pickpocket 1000 coins from NPCs and steal weapons off people's belts in the Sanctuary just because they can. If your sneaky PC wants to do that, they still can; they just have to break the rules and take risks. That's fun!
If you're an influential Tuluki leader and you want to have a sneaky guy on retainer, you still can! Regardless of whether they are licensed or not! And if you want to do something that is forbidden by the Rules, kill a templar, target someone outside of your caste, etc, you still can! You just have to break the rules, and risk a heck of a lot in the process. For both you and your artist. That's fun!
I've played a Tuluki shadow artist thief. I simply didn't have anything to do once I'd mastered my basic skills. I had to find an influential patron to get involved in anything. And as a result, I felt that playing a sneaky in Tuluk wasn't any bit different than playing one in Allanak. The docs had lied to me. No one bothered with that bit of Tuluki flavor. There was no mechanic for me to develop a reputation, no simple mechanic for me to obtain contracts without engaging in normal clan play (which sucked because I had erratic play times at the time) and choosing a side. It wasn't what I had expected for the character, and it was boring.
The proposed changes, though they are a bit raw and have a hole or two, make me excited to try playing a shadow artist in Tuluk again. Or maybe even an unlicensed criminal. Just thought I'd throw that out there.
Quote from: Ouroboros on September 27, 2013, 05:17:47 PM
I don't think I shared anything that isn't common knowledge
If it's not in the documentation then you shouldn't be sharing it. What you were sharing was not appropriate. Glad to see it wasn't anything more than that, though, no worries!
Quote from: ShaLeah on September 27, 2013, 05:14:12 PM
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 04:38:56 PM
"deemed worthy" is there as an out for templars so they don't have to ink people that are obviously bad for the job. You can get a new PC inked up pretty quickly if need be already, and this system wouldn't be much different.
But a newbie-friendly thing, hrm...that's worth thinking about.
Would you consider allowing shadow artists to get inked prior to entering the game world much like you let filthy gicks get a gem in Nak?
Maybe. If you're getting a gem in Allanak, you were pre-approved to be a magicker by virtue of karma or special application. Allanaki templars also don't automatically get told about new gemmer PCs. Should they? Not sure, not my area, maybe so...but they don't need to have a templar involved at all in order to be a gemmer. In Tuluk, they might be able to get this tattoo, but they need to get hooked up with a templar so templars know they've got another person out there with x skills or y interests so they can get them hooked up with the right work. If a newbie picks that and doesn't know what's up with the system...I don't know.
Quote
Quote from: Taven on September 27, 2013, 04:55:03 PM
Quote from: ShaLeah on September 27, 2013, 04:46:07 PMI'll cede in the whole black and white they're really untouchable thought and change to a they're NOT SO entirely untouchable frame of mind, but in a land where the social classes -are- much less able to be crossed, how much would YOU be willing to risk as a favor for a commoner?
So instead, you're arguing that a commoner should be legally allowed to kill a templar? Or am I misunderstanding?
Because I don't think some commoner should ever be legally able to kill a templar.
As to templars killing templars, it sounds like there will be ways to do that, but that it won't be allowed for in this system, there will be other ways to pursue it (based on Nyr's posts).
Yes, I think it should be allowed, never "legal" but doable. It's not legal in Allanak, but you can still get it done. Even on the off chance if I get that Chosen to be on my side and take out a contract on a Templar, how are we guaranteed they'd take the contract to begin with? Not stop it, not just take my sid and leave me hanging. Sun King forbid there be corruption, or betrayal.
If it's not legal but doable then it's always doable. Keep in mind this is Tuluk (of course, even in Allanak, nobles and templars are not the same), and there is a caste divide...as described, the Chosen are not equal to a templar. They're equal in rank but not in caste. When that is the case, caste would trump rank.
Maybe I shouldn't mention this but I did initially want to allow templar contracts in certain cases. Maybe we can revisit that; this was set up to try to be simpler rather than more complicated.
Quote
It's a lot harder to get rid of Templars in Tuluk, politically I would think it's suicide for a Chosen to take out a contract on a Templar, the other Templars would retaliate, wouldn't they?
Well, not just suicide, they aren't equals so they can't even do it (as proposed).
Quote
Templars or Chosen killing Templars is the ONLY legal way to do it in Tuluk so thus far it seems to be the best plan which is what I find unnecessarily hard, cause let's face it, if I'm a partisan to a Templar and secretly hate him/her and graduate the trust ladder to be alone and can poison the fuck, why wouldn't I? Oh yeah, cause I love my Sun King and don't wanna commit treason and can easily find a noble/templar patron to jump to my cause.
You don't have to love your Sun King. Most Tulukis do though.
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 10:31:13 AM
Quote from: Blur on September 26, 2013, 11:04:16 PM
How about if instead of a contract system it was more of a bounty system?
This one is a nice idea, too, with the only problem being the secrecy involved (a board that tells artists what is needed and how much it charges...well...it seems prone to leaks).
What if the board only stated the bare basics that there was a bounty for mug/steal/beating/hit placed on <victim>? All other information such as bounty and exact instructions and such would be told to the shadow artist by the Templar upon taking a job. Also there would be different boards for different ranks. Imagine a building with different floors, where only master maybe advance shadow artists get the valuable information on the top. New or apprentice shadow artists would only have access to board on the bottom where the smaller jobs take place.
This would mean:
1. The contractors are kept secret
2. The details of the job are kept secret
3. The person taking the job is kept secret.
4. All Shadow artists are all sworn to secrecy, revealing the information on the board or after taking a job would be an act of treason.
Now this does still mean there is still a good chance that the victim finds out there is a bounty on them but that is not a bad thing in term of game-play. Thematically the ideal of keeping secrets is upheld but not to the point where there is absolutely no way someone can't get into that delicious secret pie. I imagine too, that if the victim finds out it is probably the work of the contractor, probably hiring their own shadow artists to go spill the secret to the victim. Forcing someone to leave, effectively exiling them out of the city out of fear of being killed send such a powerful message to everyone else. This too because it would take a powerful influential and rich individual to keep the bounty going for more than an IC year. Once the victim finds out, other plots might be created as they try to find ways to protect themselves, hiring guard or legion or something else.
On top of that, having a shadow artist as a friend, lover or partisan does sound good, especially if that shadow assassin is highly ranked or a master. I can imagine those are the few reasons a shadow artist might break their code of silence to warn people they care about for one reason or another. Equally it takes the pressure off PC Templar to find shadow artists all the time to perform jobs. There might just not be any PC shadow artists qualified or even available, in which case in this system one could argue the bounty was just not good enough or again the bounty itself could be used as a means to send a message.
Anyways hope this helps, if only as food for thought, mostly since I don't believe in critiquing other people's ideas that they worked hard on without at least trying to offer some alternative myself. :)
Quote from: Barzalene on September 27, 2013, 05:21:23 PM
Good. I'm glad we got here. I think it's important to really balance the idea of guarding and preserving the game world, which often involves limiting new players from roles they don't have the world knowledge to handle, and being inclusive enough to let new players really dive in.
I would hate to see new players who could clearly be taught to be great shadow artists (clearly because they dive in rping their asses off and they'd done the research and they're sponges) denied another facet of the game because they haven't had enough time in.
To be honest, there are cases where a willing newbie is better than a clueless veteran. We don't want to keep newbies out of this. We do, however, want to have IC controls on who can and can't be an artist, just like now...except documented, unlike now.
Quote from: AllanakiLackey on September 27, 2013, 05:24:48 PM
I think that these changes would be interesting. Comments/concerns below.
On the Docs
What I don't understand from the main doc is if you can become a Shadow Artist and say "I don't do X." It's kind of addressed in the Shadow Artist FAQ subdoc with "Let them know who you are and what your areas of specialty are. This is important, as the templarate will be giving you jobs that are appropriate for your talents as well as your skill." But what does that mean? Does that mean that they can't offer you contracts outside your specialty?
It's not explicitly stated, but I was thinking of it being a "yes" to your question. "I'm wanting to be involved in thievery and mayhem projects you might have going on, but I'm not really interested in killing people, nor do I have any ideas on how to do that well." In turn that'd mean you would not be given tasks in areas you just said you don't handle.
Quote
In a related vein, knowing whether you can come in later and say, "BTW I'm now good at Y, put me on the list for Y too" or "I no longer do Y but I don't want to quit artisting entirely" would be a helpful addition to the main doc.
To the first: yes, I think you should always be able to add to the list. To the second: maybe. Some flexibility might be nice. "Had too much killing, all I see is their cold dead eyes, I just want to put poop in a Bynner's pack."
Quote
On the Discussion
I'd really enjoy seeing either (1) something like was suggested with the call/response idea earlier, giving the Shadow Artist some indication of the type of contract and allowing them to refuse, or (2) a refusal buyout. I'm much less concerned with "You want me to kill my lover?!" and a lot more concerned honest misunderstandings and mismatches.
For instance, assuming that you can give the templarate ideas of what you're willing/able to do when you register, you told Faithful Happypants when you registered that you're open to "sending messages." You're all fired up for honest to goodness back alley smack talk, but suddenly you're being approached about burglarizing Amos's apartment and leaving a dead rat in his sock drawer. Except... you have absolutely no capability to burglarize. You don't have sneaky or burglary skills, and you aren't allowed to talk about your contracts to get someone with burglary skills to help you. That wasn't the kind of message you meant! And now you know about the contract and have no capability to back out.
Sure, the liver-gnawing would make for great roleplay, but as a player I would find that extremely frustrating on an OOC level.
Yeah, they need to make it absolutely clear. Not quite...uh...guild sniffing...but let's be honest, you need to be clear about your skills here. Can you break and enter? Okay, you need to say that.
Farther along the path let's say you get a job and you realize in the job you can't handle it (codedly you just don't have the skill or don't know how or etc.). There probably should be avenues for that to be handled, too, without it being a "alright, you're dead!" response.
Whoops, nothing to see here.
Quote from: hyzhenhok on September 27, 2013, 05:41:33 PM
People seem to be missing that crime will still be possible in Tuluk outside of the shadow artist system. That's the beauty of it.
This is also a big reason for putting this up: because some people (like you) will see the silver lining that no one else does, and it forces staff to consider that silver lining and to give it depth. We didn't wholly leave out unlicensed stuff, but we definitely didn't give it that much depth, and we might want to do that.
Quote
Unlicensed criminal activity is already perfectly viable in Tuluk; it's just there's simply no reason not to get your licenses because then you have leeway to do virtually anything as long as you don't go on some crazy murder rampage. The end result is there is virtually no real criminal presence in Tuluk; all of the criminals are licensed, so all of their actions are legal! This is boring.
Now, the Sun Legions and templars will actually have something to do: they actually need to watch for common crimes, because even a licensed PC no longer has the freedom to pickpocket 1000 coins from NPCs and steal weapons off people's belts in the Sanctuary just because they can. If your sneaky PC wants to do that, they still can; they just have to break the rules and take risks. That's fun!
If you're an influential Tuluki leader and you want to have a sneaky guy on retainer, you still can! Regardless of whether they are licensed or not! And if you want to do something that is forbidden by the Rules, kill a templar, target someone outside of your caste, etc, you still can! You just have to break the rules, and risk a heck of a lot in the process. For both you and your artist. That's fun!
I've played a Tuluki shadow artist thief. I simply didn't have anything to do once I'd mastered my basic skills. I had to find an influential patron to get involved in anything. And as a result, I felt that playing a sneaky in Tuluk wasn't any bit different than playing one in Allanak. The docs had lied to me. No one bothered with that bit of Tuluki flavor. There was no mechanic for me to develop a reputation, no simple mechanic for me to obtain contracts without engaging in normal clan play (which sucked because I had erratic play times at the time) and choosing a side. It wasn't what I had expected for the character, and it was boring.
The proposed changes, though they are a bit raw and have a hole or two, make me excited to try playing a shadow artist in Tuluk again. Or maybe even an unlicensed criminal. Just thought I'd throw that out there.
Thanks, and thanks for the ideas.
This may seem like a dumb question, but it is tangentally related to the topic at hand.
Things are very "patron" based. The docs suggest that only Chosen or Faithful can be patrons, but I'm pretty sure in the past Family/Reps of the GMH Houses could also take partisans. Is that no longer true?
Also, are there any guidelines for patrons (for shadow artists, mainly)? For example, if I really like Amos but he isn't my partisan now, can I short-term offer him patronage, for the length of a single job? That way I know who can be hired, and I can talk to him about it. Oooor, is there a minimum time limit required for being a patron to a specific shadow artist?
It always felt like playing an unlicensed criminal was almost similar to trying to play a defiler in the middle of the city. Doable but probably not for very long. Both for similar reasons.
Things be changing more than advertised?
Quote from: Taven on September 27, 2013, 06:05:03 PM
This may seem like a dumb question, but it is tangentally related to the topic at hand.
Things are very "patron" based. The docs suggest that only Chosen or Faithful can be patrons, but I'm pretty sure in the past Family/Reps of the GMH Houses could also take partisans. Is that no longer true?
Technically anyone can be a patron or partisan to anyone else:
QuotePatronage is a formal agreement between two parties for the benefit of both. Patronage may be either long-term or short-term. This can take many different forms. The following examples are not meant to limit what can be done but highlight the possibilities.
The noble was used because it's the most common one; there are plenty of other examples of what can be done though.
Quote
Also, are there any guidelines for patrons (for shadow artists, mainly)? For example, if I really like Amos but he isn't my patron now, can I short-term offer him patronage, for the length of a single job? That way I know who can be hired, and I can talk to him about it. Oooor, is there a minimum time limit required for being a patron to a specific shadow artist?
Hmm. No, there are not. Should there be? That sounds like it's a hole you just found. "I can't pick who I want for a job...but I can engage in a short term patronage relationship with this guy who I know is awesome...so I'll use him for one job...and get around that rule, because he's my guy!" You guys are sneaky.
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 06:10:11 PM
Quote
Also, are there any guidelines for patrons (for shadow artists, mainly)? For example, if I really like Amos but he isn't my patron now, can I short-term offer him patronage, for the length of a single job? That way I know who can be hired, and I can talk to him about it. Oooor, is there a minimum time limit required for being a patron to a specific shadow artist?
Hmm. No, there are not. Should there be? That sounds like it's a hole you just found. "I can't pick who I want for a job...but I can engage in a short term patronage relationship with this guy who I know is awesome...so I'll use him for one job...and get around that rule, because he's my guy!" You guys are sneaky.
Sneakies. In the Shadow artist thread.
>.>
<.<
Are we going to be fined because we were caught? :'(
...More seriously. Is that hole a hole, or a feature? I mean on one hand, you could be pressured into accepting more jobs because a noble wants specifically you...but you get more money for that anyway, and you can chat about shit, which sounds more plotty. On the other hand, it might be harder to get long-term patronage, if someone can just claim you short term. But you're still doing the jobs anyway, even if you aren't someone's partistan, in theory... Hmmm. This should be considered further.
I think this is an interesting idea.
But I really am not seeing how the Templars are to be "kept in line" The entire idea that you "don't cut off the hand that feeds you" has not, to date, been backed up in the game at all by Templars and I don't see that changing.
In the past, in either city, I have had or been around PCs who were willing to pay Templars, in coins, services etc, and to do so on a scheduled basis, very large amounts, amounts I dare say that are higher, by a great margin I am sure, then what Templars stand to gain in this system and still they usually ignored the money are killed or tried to kill.
Then, and it may have been mentioned, but what about things that go against the Templars personal interest? Even if for some odd reason they don't just disappear the guy that wants Poofy the Templars favorite bard killed, what is to stop the Templar from just assigning a shadow artist that simply could not pull it off or manipulating the system in other ways?
And, assuming things were put into place to satisfy anybody's worries on the above questions and others...then why in hell would anybody ever want to play a Templar in the north...might as well re-open nenyuk for play at that point, it would be more fun.
(Edit) I do take one point back, there as been one well known southern Templar that nearly never killed off the cash cows for petty reasons...but that quality Templar is so rare that one in twenty two years does not bode well for another.
Murder. Corruption. Betrayal.
Player driven plots.
First, I'd like somethings answered definitively, instead of implied at.
-Why is this change going in place?
-Is this system new, or has it always been the case, IC?
-All inked citizens, other then templars, are able to become shadow artists?
Second, I have a few questions about things that have been said, and I'd like to put some thoughts out.
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 02:51:15 PM
What you're asking for is in the system today, but it's also a system today that is underused and seemingly prone to corruption; these docs would fix that.
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 02:51:15 PM
It's not prone to corruption. It's "seemingly" prone to corruption. This would remove the seemingly entirely and make it not prone to corruption. Why do we want it to be less corrupt? Not sure. I just want it to be used if it's there. If it requires it to look like it's a system that works, and requires some restrictions initially, I'm all for trying it.
So you, an admin (once a temporary producer) of the staff, aren't sure why you want a IG system to be -less- corrupt, got it.
You also aren't "all for trying it" you -are- trying it. Unless your going to rephrase what you said.
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 02:51:15 PM
these are not active documents (so you do not need to use them in-game yet).
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 02:51:15 PM
templars will be above the system, outside of the system, and brokering the system.
Their task is not to manipulate, at least not in THIS area.
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 02:51:15 PM
Templars won't screw you over with this system.
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 02:51:15 PM
They are not doing jobs for templars. Templars might also be the hiring agent at time
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 02:51:15 PM
we are not forbidding templars from killing anyone.
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 02:51:15 PM
Now consider a
scenario where templars run the system by these rules.
I assume this is part of the not corrupt system. We will take it on faith that templars will do this task, flawlessly at all times, and not manipulate the system.
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 02:51:15 PM
Just like an artist would have to do their job, a templar would have to do their job--which means making the system work. Sure, they might HAVE IC biases.
Acting on them by manipulating this brokerage system would be foolhardy.
A system not corrupt, at all, because something is foolhardy.
In regards to one's social status, which can be life or death in Tuluk, the docs say this...
"The most important thing to keep in mind is subtlety. Overt, obvious actions are looked down upon as a general rule."
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 02:51:15 PM
THIS SYSTEM IS NOT JUST FOR KILLING PEOPLE,
IT'S FOR LOTS OF STUFF, ALL HAVING TO DO WITH SENDING A MESSAGE.
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 02:51:15 PM
It's not very Tuluki to mug someone, but if you need to send a message to
someone that's encroaching on your turf, hiring an
artist to go beat the shit out that person sure sounds like fun.
Would one actually use the shadow brokers and artists to do this?
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 11:41:13 AM
Quote from: Jherlen on September 27, 2013, 02:23:04 AM
But besides love, there are lots of other viable reasons I can see an artist wanting to refuse -- most of these will probably be far more common anyway.
- The contract is beyond their skill and they know it, and they don't want to risk failure or death.
- The contract is beneath their skill and isn't a challenge, and they don't want to waste their time
- The reward offered isn't worth the risk, or isn't enough to cover expenses
- They're too busy with other work
1) Templar shouldn't be giving a contract to someone that can't do it.
2) Artist shouldn't have that kind of attitude; if they got asked to do it is because they were the best one for the job (or the only PC available?)
3) This should never, ever, ever be an issue; the reward should always be worth the risk and also be enough to cover expenses
4) Not being able to refuse is not the same as not being able to delay or negotiate details.
On point number 2.
What if the artist is an elf?
On stealing from elven roleplay...
" If an elf sees something that belongs to someone else,
and provides moderate challenge for them, they want to take it - simply for the sake of taking it."
Similar questions are springing to mind now.
What if the only artist available for a certain task isn't human?
A dwarf with a focus to work around. An elf with a tribe to work around.
I rather not see legionnaires be able to be shadow artists too. It just feels too unfair.
However, considering what I have seen in the past those may just be my feelings.
Quote from: Blur on September 27, 2013, 06:08:37 PM
It always felt like playing an unlicensed criminal was almost similar to trying to play a defiler in the middle of the city. Doable but probably not for very long. Both for similar reasons.
Things be changing more than advertised?
Playing an unlicensed criminal in Tuluk is not really any different than playing a normal criminal in Allanak, except you don't have an obvious safe haven within the city walls. In some ways I'd argue Tuluk is more criminal friendly, even leaving licenses aside.
It's all been very playable ever since crimcode was disabled at night years ago. Once you play around with it a bit and figure out what you can and can't get away with, it's very doable.
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 03:12:58 PM
Quote from: janeshephard on September 27, 2013, 01:56:21 PM
Yes. I'd rather they were kept in the dark but only stepped in to check licensing when they suspect the rules were broken, than to make them always agree to contracts. I'll be frank. I think you'll see a steep drop in artistry if they get turned into automaton that must accept every contract their offered.
I'll be frank, too...I doubt that it can get much lower or less utilized than it is now. I'm willing to accept that if that turns out to be the case and adjust it farther down the road.
I like that you realize this. Can I open a request to northern staff and address this point with some IC information?
Thanks.
Quote from: hyzhenhok on September 27, 2013, 07:35:04 PM
It's all been very playable ever since crimcode was disabled at night years ago. Once you play around with it a bit and figure out what you can and can't get away with, it's very doable.
I -totally- did not know crim code was disabled at night. Is this even true?
Quote from: janeshephard on September 27, 2013, 08:39:32 PM
I -totally- did not know crim code was disabled at night. Is this even true?
Yes. Most city rooms in the game have virtual NPCs who will witness you committing a crime if you aren't discrete. This virtual NPC crime reporting is removed from most outdoor streets during night hours (late at night and before dusk). This was implemented way back in 2009 or something.
It should probably be mentioned in the Criminal and/or Crime and Punishment documents if it isn't.
Edit: Found it. http://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,32997.0.html
Quote from: MorgenesFirst thing, I have not altered the way the code works if there is a soldier/templar nearby when a crime takes place. This code alters the way the populated room flag (that is virtual eyes and ears of the populace that would report a crime to the authorities) behaves under certain conditions.
Before if a room was marked populated it always was considered 'populated' and crimes would be reported.
This change adds the following conditions:
o Visibility must not be extremely poor (sandstorm, darkness, etc... note indoors rooms such as taverns are never affected by this)
o The time is not during night-time hours. When it is 'late at night' or 'near dawn', the populated flags no longer apply (unless again, the room is flagged indoors as well).
Quote from: hyzhenhok on September 27, 2013, 07:35:04 PM
Quote from: Blur on September 27, 2013, 06:08:37 PM
It always felt like playing an unlicensed criminal was almost similar to trying to play a defiler in the middle of the city. Doable but probably not for very long. Both for similar reasons.
Things be changing more than advertised?
Playing an unlicensed criminal in Tuluk is not really any different than playing a normal criminal in Allanak, except you don't have an obvious safe haven within the city walls. In some ways I'd argue Tuluk is more criminal friendly, even leaving licenses aside.
It's all been very playable ever since crimcode was disabled at night years ago. Once you play around with it a bit and figure out what you can and can't get away with, it's very doable.
I feel it would be a different situation in Tuluk than Allanak and it has nothing to do with crimcode or even lack of rinth. Still though, this probably too IC, and there was already a warning about that. Besides I could totally be wrong anyways. :-X
If a legionnaire is a shadow artist, then he should temporarily be dismissed during his job. Otherwise, the crim code will be the greatest Shadow Artist of all!
Personally, if I was ... anybody, with money and some kind of position that allows taking in partisans. I'm getting myself a whole crew of shadow artists. Some of them, will love me so much, they'll remain journeyman forever. Some of them will one day become masters, but I will know their styles and techniques 'so well', that ... I'll be the most difficult person for them to pull a job on. Even if they've got free entrance to my compounds, or whatever.
I will "love" this situation. My rival comes to the Templar and requests a contract against my house. The Templar groans and says that all currently suitable shadow artists for the job 'work' for that house and are not masters.
I will also probably try to corrupt them all and somehow create a hidden method of communication that allows the artist to tell me about his jobs in one shape, or another.
But anyway, that's what I think I would do.
Some thoughts about killing templars, or going outside of the system.
Mobsters meet up in a sikrit meeting and decide that their capo has been taking up the spot too long. If he is to die, one of the mobsters will move up and the rest will pledge allegiance to him. Do they then go and shoot the guy to pieces? Hell no. They're all part of the same family, they cant shoot each other! NO! They will contract out "outside" help. From another family, from another city even. People without connections to the mobsters completely. This ... can ... work ... absolutely ... the same in Tuluk.
To be promoted up via murder method, you 'gotta' think outside the box. Mental equilibristics is paramount to this. Faithful Lady is tightening her grip too much, forcing the tradesmen to leave the city in search of fresher air elsewhere. This saps the coin from the coffers and makes it difficult to upkeep the standing legions. Words and bribing do not work. She is not disloyal, but ... old age made her senile. By the power granted to me by Muk Utep's wisdom, I must defend Tuluk from her senility, even if it means she must die.
Here's an interesting scenario.
A person comes to the Templar and offers a contract of bringing fear to the populace and helping them understand the necessity of the Legion. To do this, he wishes a shadow artist to mug and rob people, selling their belongings and bringing the money to the contractor. The amount of money is exactly 2x of the fee the Templar requests.
There seems to be agreement that the current "system" doesn't work...
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 11:48:12 AM
Quote from: Jingo on September 27, 2013, 03:43:34 AM
I've played in tuluk as a fairly well known assassin. Nobody wanted anyone dead, nobody even tasked him to spy on their rivals.
Thanks, I'm glad some former assassins are chiming in...it got a little lonely, no?
Quote from: hyzhenhok on September 27, 2013, 05:41:33 PM
I've played a Tuluki shadow artist thief. I simply didn't have anything to do once I'd mastered my basic skills. I had to find an influential patron to get involved in anything. And as a result, I felt that playing a sneaky in Tuluk wasn't any bit different than playing one in Allanak. The docs had lied to me. No one bothered with that bit of Tuluki flavor. There was no mechanic for me to develop a reputation, no simple mechanic for me to obtain contracts without engaging in normal clan play (which sucked because I had erratic play times at the time) and choosing a side. It wasn't what I had expected for the character, and it was boring.
Namely the current "system" is underutilized...
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 02:51:15 PM
What you're asking for is in the system today, but it's also a system today that is underused and seemingly prone to corruption; these docs would fix that.
...
I kinda have to laugh that we're discussing the intricacies of whether we have enough role depth available for people to play lawful criminals in Tuluk. Honestly, not many people are doing it, nor are they really using the current system.
So the current "system" has failed and seemingly needs to be replaced with a new system that is stacked full of mandates to force more use of the new system compared to the current "system." However, I think this is based on a false assumption that the current "system" isn't working because of a lack of mandates. I think the current "system" doesn't work because no one knows about it! I'll bet that the majority of posters in the thread were unaware that templars can currently confidentially broker contracts between an agent and a "shadow artist." I didn't know until fairly recently. So is the failure of the current "system" one of design or of implementation? There are no detailed public documents about the current "system," even. Of course it won't work. IMO "shadow artists" are currently underutilized not because they're refusing jobs or they're overly loyal, but because most players are oblivious and uncertain about what the current "system" is and what the expectations are for their roles, especially for contracting agents and "shadow artists." This uncertainty might manifest as reluctance or excess loyalty, but those are symptoms and not causes.
The new documentation is stacked full of mandates for the contracting agent, for the templars, and for the "shadow artists," and it looks to me that the mandates are the biggest source of concern for those responding in this thread. I know those many mandates are my biggest personal concern.
So those of us that are concerned are being asked to trust in the new documents and to give it a shot:
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 04:34:14 PM
Quote from: Ouroboros on September 27, 2013, 03:56:00 PM
No, what I'm saying is that we can accept that players are biased as a whole, and instead of pretending it isn't the case, recognize it, minimize it where we can, and balance it where we can't so that at least the playing field is level from an OOC standpoint.
I don't think we're pretending it isn't the case that players can be biased. I think we're asking that players play above that and roleplay since it's the first rule of the game. If it doesn't work or seems horrible to play, we can change it, but I'd rather give the playerbase the opportunity to try something out that is different rather than just assume "well...this will never work because players can't handle it."
But I think what many of us are asking is to be trusted in our roleplay to try out a documented system of "shadow artistry" without all the mandates, and in response we're being told "this will never work because players can't handle it" without mandates.
I like the detail of the new system and other features as I've previously pointed out, and I'm confident we would see increased utilization if we were given a chance to try it out without all the mandates. And if it doesn't work because no one uses the system without the ironclad guarantees provided by the myriad mandates, what will have been lost by trying it out for a while? I personally would be more accepting of the mandate-heavy regime if I had seen a documented but mandate-light system fail after all this public discussion.
However, if the mandate-heavy system is implemented and we see increased utilization, how will we know whether the increased utilization is due to the mandates or due to the mere fact that we finally have a publicly documented system that everyone involved knows about and understands?
It really does concern me that a lot of the arguments are revolving around people saying "what if a Chosen wants to kill another Chosen" or "If one Templar can't kill another Templar..."
Seriously. That is nitpicking of the utmost. The current system doesn't work. Few people understand it, fewer use it. Tuluk has legalized crime, but there aren't many that play there, Leaders or otherwise, that really understand how to use it to the fullest extent. That is why I mentioned earlier that I hope the Agents taking out the Contracts can eventually get some ideas on how or what things can be done.
The way I see it, the "major" things people would go for are assassination, theft, burglary. These three things can be done in a "subtle" and "masterful" way in the vein of Tuluki society. But what of the other crimes? Mugging, getting a few guys to beat down some well-to-do Merchant who is big for his britches, publically defacing someone's work (statues, buildings, etc)
Maybe just a page of examples, even eventually, of what could happen, so people have ideas. I think the thought that "Tuluk is too subtle for overt acts of Artistry" is so prevalent that the system will eventually turn back into what we have now. Nobody making Contracts because there are few who can perform the job, because the only Contracts people have are "Just kill this guy".
As an addendum, there might be a look at PC->PC theft as well. How exactly do you steal someone's prized and favored weapon, if they never take it off? (Not REALLY asking, there are definite ways, but with how the code works and how HYPER VIGILANT PCs are... just think about it.)
I'll admit up front to not having deeply read the full 10 pages (though I plan to work through that).
I'll also start out by expressing gratitude to Nyr for giving this discussion the attention it has received.
While I don't yet know if I like the proposed change - I agree that there is need. If for nothing else than to quell the desperately OOC "rarr! thief!" rage that leeches into IC play.
Some initial gut reactions:
* For existing accomplished master (not necessarily Master) thiefses, resplendent in licenses and exquisite in ability I would hope there would either be a type of grandfathering in of PCs who have been developed under radically different circumstances and expectations or some other way of "opting out" of the new system without too many character-ending consequences.
^As an addition to that, my hope is that this would be introduced as a new thing going forward in Tuluk rather than a retcon. I think I did pick up on it being the former, though, in one of the scan-throughs.
* While I read in several places of the documents guiding templars, I have played this game too long to have much faith in the power of documentation to guide positions of power. Even my experience with the existing system has had me in some rather head-scratching situations wondering if I was reading the same docs.
* 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).
* It is hard to play a burg/pickpkt/ass well. A new look at the guidelines & practices of licensed skullduggery is welcomed. Knee-jerk reaction to change like this is bound to be negative. . . I'm going to simmer in this sauce a bit more, read Nyr's responses a little deeper, and see what positive feelings bubble up.
Quote from: Riev on September 28, 2013, 06:51:49 AM
Maybe just a page of examples, even eventually, of what could happen, so people have ideas. I think the thought that "Tuluk is too subtle for overt acts of Artistry" is so prevalent that the system will eventually turn back into what we have now. Nobody making Contracts because there are few who can perform the job, because the only Contracts people have are "Just kill this guy".
Riev, I think it might be worth reading through Nyr's posts on Catching Up: Tuluk. A quote that may interest you:
Quote from: Nyr on September 25, 2013, 01:14:40 PM
Old Tuluki subtlety may be on its deathbed. Recent events have helped propel it along, and docs will eventually flesh it out more as existing characters settle in to the new swing of things but:
Tulukis don't need to dance around every single issue in the most intricate way possible in order to play a Tuluki properly. It shouldn't take four kinds of euphemisms to discuss every issue, and behind closed doors when no one is there to see or hear you, maybe you can let your SubtletyGuardTM down long enough to speak frankly. There are absolutely times when overt, chilling action is needed...in order so that it may be covered up later.
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 10:17:09 AM
Quote6. If this system is going to be reliant on status and power brokers willing to take the chances, isn't it perhaps time to open up the Surif on a much broader level than is currently being seen in Tuluk?
Frankly, we've been running full steam since an HRPT 2 months ago; we can't change everything overnight even if we do have plans. Yes. It would be nice to have another Surif noble, and we'll put up a call, but it might be a bit longer.
I respect that stance of it being necessary to get the bigger pieces in place for the HRPT so the trickle down changes can happen, but there's a major flaw in the "system" be it a new one or an old one, when the positions of influence to guide and direct the system aren't in place, the system will fail because of lack of interest. This has been referenced previously, http://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php?PHPSESSID=cvdf0m5gtnt0eboih29131qus2&topic=46143.msg776056#msg776056 (http://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php?PHPSESSID=cvdf0m5gtnt0eboih29131qus2&topic=46143.msg776056#msg776056) and as a player who has come and gone and come back to playing in Tuluk, we'll say over the last three years, all there really is present is "more of the same". And I'm not casting doubt on the players who are already there guiding things socially, but there comes a time when new blood is necessary. I won't say that I've seen all of the attempts to sprinkle new blood into the shark infested waters, but the few I have seen have had almost no longevity and activity, which damages any credibility that a system in place might have. It's simply impossible to get your footing for the new or old systems without the bedrock to build off of, and in this case, the bedrock is a decent number of active nobles, representation from regular playing GMH and yes, templars.
I think that the old system, largely unknown and untalked about, so therefore underutilized, would have been fine had there been someone pushing it from behind the scenes, and the new system could be equally promising in the same contest, but without the people who work the puppet strings, nobody will want to play puppets. Lack of information (DOCS!) and direction (VIP Characters) make any and all systems flawed and hard to play in. So making up an entirely new system that puts more power into a few pcs, in this case templars, it still doesn't fix the root issue for any changes that will be put into place in Tuluk, and that is....
Nobody will care if it's Noble House A vs Noble House B again, for three straight years, so there will be very few bards in the City, since there are few options on who to impress, and with fewer bards there will be fewer people pissed off by said bards, and with fewer GMH representatives who have longevity and vested interest in the City, there are fewer venues for lower ranked players to get jobs from, which keeps them from spending in the markets, crafting, foraging, buying things from PC traders, and yes...having things that other people want to kill, steal and burgle for...which makes Shadow Artists pointless since they would otherwise only be doing...the exact same thing they are doing now in the new system, except being told to do it by templarate middle-(wo)men. Which leaves a game which is turning out a higher who list than it has ever seen before with one of it's two MAJOR centers of virtual population floundering...with a shiny, new system that ends up looking just as uninteresting and flawed as the previous one.
Don't micromanage the system and put barriers and restrictions in place to streamline something that wasn't really broken, just underutilized.
The HRPT's are shaking things up from the top down...why not make the bold statement of shaking things in the middle a bit too?
You know, for a city where people live much longer than in Allanak, I'm not entirely certain if a lack of people and longevity is the problem here.
Quote from: Law&Order on September 28, 2013, 11:53:00 AM
It's simply impossible to get your footing for the new or old systems without the bedrock to build off of, and in this case, the bedrock is a decent number of active nobles, representation from regular playing GMH and yes, templars.
We need active nobles and templars and good documentation.
These roles are difficult to pull off 'properly' and include other players.
I'll probably app the next noble role to 'be the change.'
Quote from: Patuk on September 28, 2013, 12:18:10 PM
You know, for a city where people live much longer than in Allanak, I'm not entirely certain if a lack of people and longevity is the problem here.
Then what is it then? Is making the system even harder and less welcoming to enjoy the answer?
I'd love it if there were more shadow artists, or usage thereof, it should be a relatively easy process and I think it's so ICly restrictive and OOCly unappealing that if getting more
active shadow artists is the goal, the changes will not make that happen. They would be better shadow artists though, so I can see the appeal of
that.
Quote from: Taven on September 27, 2013, 06:15:22 PM
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 06:10:11 PM
Quote
Also, are there any guidelines for patrons (for shadow artists, mainly)? For example, if I really like Amos but he isn't my patron now, can I short-term offer him patronage, for the length of a single job? That way I know who can be hired, and I can talk to him about it. Oooor, is there a minimum time limit required for being a patron to a specific shadow artist?
Hmm. No, there are not. Should there be? That sounds like it's a hole you just found. "I can't pick who I want for a job...but I can engage in a short term patronage relationship with this guy who I know is awesome...so I'll use him for one job...and get around that rule, because he's my guy!" You guys are sneaky.
Sneakies. In the Shadow artist thread.
>.>
<.<
Are we going to be fined because we were caught? :'(
...More seriously. Is that hole a hole, or a feature? I mean on one hand, you could be pressured into accepting more jobs because a noble wants specifically you...but you get more money for that anyway, and you can chat about shit, which sounds more plotty. On the other hand, it might be harder to get long-term patronage, if someone can just claim you short term. But you're still doing the jobs anyway, even if you aren't someone's partistan, in theory... Hmmm. This should be considered further.
Not sure yet. That might seem surprising, but this is one of the few cases where we can show what we're planning to do...not spoil IC stuff to any extremes (i.e., this isn't like saying "so what do you guys think about the Hlum")...and then adjust based on feedback and criticism. Part of throwing these documentation pieces out there in advance of implementation was to find the holes (liked, disliked, intended, or unintended)
NOW rather than after implementation. While the implementation will be in-character and any changes to the system can be developed in-character, it is best to get us on the best footing initially rather than see such a thing sputter along for months while it gets hacked apart and changed to fix noticed problems.
The system is broken, not just underutilized. Under the current system Templars have the ability to act as proxies and give contracts to licensed thieves and assassins, and I seriously doubt the reason it isn't used is that nobody has thought to try it. The problem is the templars cannot reliably deliver the service, because the licensed artists currently owe nothing to the templarate after they get their license. Instead they become loyal servants of X leader PC, and of course nobody outside of X leader has any real chance of hiring them to do something cool. And why would X leader ever risk trying to hire someone outside of their House for risky, potentially embarrassing jobs?
The end result is shadow artists rarely if ever get contracts; they just become another type of house servant. Which is boring. If you think lack of trust or lack of shadow artists will be a problem with the proposed system, I can guarantee you it's an even bigger problem with the current system. These new docs succeed in a few very important things:
- Opportunity cost for artists to get licensed. Paying some coins for a license has never been a significant cost. Requiring licensed artists to do jobs when called upon in exchange for state sanction? Now there's an interesting trade-off.
- Shadow artists are required to work more closely with the templarate, so the templarate can get a much clearer picture of who is capable of what. It's all well and good to say they can already serve as middlemen, but to be frank, I bet most templars never see an artist again after they license them.
- System opened up for people who don't have the time or resources to have a personal shadow artist on retainer, or whose clans do not have any position for such PCs in their ranks. Now that you know 1) the templars will actually be keeping tabs on the city's shadow artists and 2) eventually a shadow artist will be forced to take your contract, and 3) the docs say if a templar betrays your contract, they are in big doo doo, it suddenly becomes much more realistic to use the system.
Quote from: hyzhenhok on September 28, 2013, 12:29:12 PM
Instead they become loyal servants of X leader PC, and of course nobody outside of X leader has any real chance of hiring them to do something cool. And why would X leader ever risk trying to hire someone outside of their House for risky, potentially embarrassing jobs?
I would hire people outside my House to do stuff so it doesn't lead back to me.
Quote from: X-D on September 27, 2013, 06:16:11 PM
I think this is an interesting idea.
But I really am not seeing how the Templars are to be "kept in line" The entire idea that you "don't cut off the hand that feeds you" has not, to date, been backed up in the game at all by Templars and I don't see that changing.
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)? You're saying you don't see how the templars are to be kept in line or how they're supposed to run the program, and in general you're right--but that doesn't mean there's nothing keeping them in line.
Quote
In the past, in either city, I have had or been around PCs who were willing to pay Templars, in coins, services etc, and to do so on a scheduled basis, very large amounts, amounts I dare say that are higher, by a great margin I am sure, then what Templars stand to gain in this system and still they usually ignored the money are killed or tried to kill.
Then, and it may have been mentioned, but what about things that go against the Templars personal interest? Even if for some odd reason they don't just disappear the guy that wants Poofy the Templars favorite bard killed, what is to stop the Templar from just assigning a shadow artist that simply could not pull it off or manipulating the system in other ways?
That's also covered briefly in the doc I mentioned above.
Quote
And, assuming things were put into place to satisfy anybody's worries on the above questions and others...then why in hell would anybody ever want to play a Templar in the north...might as well re-open nenyuk for play at that point, it would be more fun.
Then I'm not clear on what you mean exactly. You are pointing out that you want to know what is in place to encourage this practice among templars, then following that up with "but that would make being a templar boring and unfun." Which is it that is more important in your opinion--making the system work better than it does now, or making it more fun for templars than it is now? We're trying to consider both, too, but I'm not sure where you're sitting on it.
Quote from: janeshephard on September 28, 2013, 12:34:01 PM
Quote from: hyzhenhok on September 28, 2013, 12:29:12 PM
Instead they become loyal servants of X leader PC, and of course nobody outside of X leader has any real chance of hiring them to do something cool. And why would X leader ever risk trying to hire someone outside of their House for risky, potentially embarrassing jobs?
I would hire people outside my House to do stuff so it doesn't lead back to me.
Really? Even when every other skilled, licensed artist is already employed by another House or organization? The way Tuluk works, if you're good at something you don't tend to stay independent for long.
Quote from: hyzhenhok on September 28, 2013, 12:39:34 PM
The way Tuluk works, if you're good at something you don't tend to stay independent for long.
We must be playing two different muds :)
Quote from: hyzhenhok on September 28, 2013, 12:39:34 PM
Quote from: janeshephard on September 28, 2013, 12:34:01 PM
Quote from: hyzhenhok on September 28, 2013, 12:29:12 PM
Instead they become loyal servants of X leader PC, and of course nobody outside of X leader has any real chance of hiring them to do something cool. And why would X leader ever risk trying to hire someone outside of their House for risky, potentially embarrassing jobs?
I would hire people outside my House to do stuff so it doesn't lead back to me.
Really? Even when every other skilled, licensed artist is already employed by another House or organization? The way Tuluk works, if you're good at something you don't tend to stay independent for long.
looooooooooooooooool
Pretty much what Patuk said. It does change over time, but there are periods where everyone you meet is an indie in Tuluk. I imagine it's the same for Allanak.
I regard that as a problem, to be honest. While it's not directly relevant to this discussion, I think 'status' needs to be a much higher priority in Tuluk. There needs to be stronger IC motivations to work for GMHs or Nobles in Tuluk.
You know. Not the usual "do I get to leave the gates? oh ok i'm in then."
...um, yeah. I'm pretty sure if it were so easy to get independent, licensed shadow artists to do your dirty work right now, staff wouldn't be trying to overhaul the system.
But what do I know, I stopped trying to play criminals in Tuluk because my licensed master pickpocket had nothing to do except join a clan, and haven't played there in a while.
If you guys are talking about the scores of indie hunters in Tuluk, those are not really relevant to the topic at hand.
The greatest obstacle to the whole "Shadow Artist System" is the unavailability or lack of capable shadow artists. In a system where failure is the only way to learn and failure is illegal.... that seems to be a problem. If there were some system or organization that helped to cultivate and develop young shadow artist talent, I Think that alone would go a long way to helping develop the art of crime in Tuluk. The documentation is great and people can argue about the finer details of the organization until they are blue int he face, but if the role of the shadow artist is too difficult and/or unrewarding, people just won't play those roles.
Quote from: Medivh on September 27, 2013, 06:41:40 PM
Murder. Corruption. Betrayal.
Player driven plots.
First, I'd like somethings answered definitively, instead of implied at.
I think that it has been answered definitively here and elsewhere, but I'll be happy to go over it again and go into more detail.
Quote-Why is this change going in place?
Early last year we started moving clan documentation to clan discussion boards. This serves a few purposes: it allows protection of the documentation for a clan by removing people from its access after they leave the forum, it removes the need for "clan documentation requests" (because a forum join = a clan documentation request--not that we have a lot, but it removes a small amount of workload), and it allows nearly instantaneous updating and feedback to documentation by staff (whereas before we needed to have admin+ code staff to do anything for website docs that were password protected). This also meant that in the case of severely old documentation, it could be updated (why not do it while we're moving things?) and it could take into account feedback of people in those groups. Around the middle of last year, I came to be the administrator of Tuluk and its clans, so we started working on that area and got Bards done. The process began on the templarate and noble houses, but we realized a lot of structural stuff just wasn't working that well, either, and it would need to be reviewed. It isn't enough to change one thing at a time if the culture of the city wasn't backing up each individual group and vice versa. So that began the process everyone is seeing this summer and so on in Tuluk.
One area in particular for review was the artist system. The artist system as reviewed by staff does not seem to work from our perspective. It exists in law as how things are handled but it is not particularly well-documented, nor is it particularly well-utilized. Two issues I pointed out earlier (reluctant artists and loyal artists) resulted in two problems: jobs that could have been handled by artists weren't being handled at all, and artists were being capitalized on by individual groups instead of the city as a whole. Bards we changed away from that and got it so anyone could become a Master Bard if they put in the time and energy, but we made it clear that the higher reaches of bardic rank equaled dedication to the CIRCLE rather than to a patron. This allows dedicated, achievement-oriented players to focus on long-lived roles that were not necessarily sponsored that got to reach high levels of influence and power that are built in a way that are not game-breaking. We'd like to see the same sort of thing happen to artists, but we don't think that happens unless master level artists have incentive to break free from organizational ties and become servants of the city-state's needs as a whole rather than servants of a patron's interests.
Quote-Is this system new, or has it always been the case, IC?
It is new, the first page of this thread and a few other posts inside the thread explain that it will supplant existing documentation. The documentation itself (the beta form) even says that it changes IC after 1628 (recent events), so there's no way it could have "always been the case IC".
Quote-All inked citizens, other then templars, are able to become shadow artists?
All inked citizens that are deemed worthy of handling it--it's possible that people might not make the initial cut to become an inked shadow artist because they are deemed too risky a choice for the entire system.
Quote
Second, I have a few questions about things that have been said, and I'd like to put some thoughts out.
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 02:51:15 PM
What you're asking for is in the system today, but it's also a system today that is underused and seemingly prone to corruption; these docs would fix that.
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 02:51:15 PM
It's not prone to corruption. It's "seemingly" prone to corruption. This would remove the seemingly entirely and make it not prone to corruption. Why do we want it to be less corrupt? Not sure. I just want it to be used if it's there. If it requires it to look like it's a system that works, and requires some restrictions initially, I'm all for trying it.
So you, an admin (once a temporary producer) of the staff, aren't sure why you want a IG system to be -less- corrupt, got it.
Correct. I (an admin, and once a producer) of the staff, am not sure why I want an IG system to be less corrupt. I'd like to make the IG system used more than it is now. The biggest sticking point I've seen in occasional complaints, reports, and mentionables here and there on the board and in-game are that the appearance of corruption in this particular system stymies and keeps it from being used--therefore I feel it is important to get rid of the appearance of that corruption so that the system ends up being used. If the goal is to create a system that doesn't work, is eminently corruptible in view if not in fact (and perception is often more important than reality), and prevents murdering, corrupting, and betrayal in OTHER AREAS of Tuluk, then we can just leave it the way it is now. We don't have to make any changes if we want it to continue to not work and be undocumented.
QuoteYou also aren't "all for trying it" you -are- trying it. Unless your going to rephrase what you said.
I said all for trying it because I am all for trying it. That was in reference to the previous statement: I'm all for trying a system out that has MORE restrictions to reduce the appearance of corruption in order to make the system work...because if it DOESN'T work after we try it, we can find reason to change it afterwards. I am not trying it yet because the documentation is not live, and we're getting feedback from players (including you) on this area, reviewing what seems to work and what seems to not work about the system.
Quote
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 02:51:15 PM
these are not active documents (so you do not need to use them in-game yet).
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 02:51:15 PM
templars will be above the system, outside of the system, and brokering the system.
Their task is not to manipulate, at least not in THIS area.
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 02:51:15 PM
Templars won't screw you over with this system.
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 02:51:15 PM
They are not doing jobs for templars. Templars might also be the hiring agent at time
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 02:51:15 PM
we are not forbidding templars from killing anyone.
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 02:51:15 PM
Now consider a
scenario where templars run the system by these rules.
I assume this is part of the not corrupt system. We will take it on faith that templars will do this task, flawlessly at all times, and not manipulate the system.
You already take it on faith that plenty of roles do certain tasks that they are supposed to do. You don't question that a Great Merchant House sponsored role does things for that Great Merchant House, like handle sales for a particular area...do you? We are saying that this is part of a templar's job in Tuluk, and that this system is something considered traditional (though expanded) in Tuluk, so people expect it to work.
Quote
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 02:51:15 PM
Just like an artist would have to do their job, a templar would have to do their job--which means making the system work. Sure, they might HAVE IC biases.
Acting on them by manipulating this brokerage system would be foolhardy.
A system not corrupt, at all, because something is foolhardy.
In regards to one's social status, which can be life or death in Tuluk, the docs say this...
"The most important thing to keep in mind is subtlety. Overt, obvious actions are looked down upon as a general rule."
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 02:51:15 PM
THIS SYSTEM IS NOT JUST FOR KILLING PEOPLE,
IT'S FOR LOTS OF STUFF, ALL HAVING TO DO WITH SENDING A MESSAGE.
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 02:51:15 PM
It's not very Tuluki to mug someone, but if you need to send a message to
someone that's encroaching on your turf, hiring an
artist to go beat the shit out that person sure sounds like fun.
Would one actually use the shadow brokers and artists to do this?
Yes, that's part of the open-ended nature of these contracts. If it sends a message to someone, it more than likely is something a shadow artist can be used for.
Quote
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 11:41:13 AM
Quote from: Jherlen on September 27, 2013, 02:23:04 AM
But besides love, there are lots of other viable reasons I can see an artist wanting to refuse -- most of these will probably be far more common anyway.
- The contract is beyond their skill and they know it, and they don't want to risk failure or death.
- The contract is beneath their skill and isn't a challenge, and they don't want to waste their time
- The reward offered isn't worth the risk, or isn't enough to cover expenses
- They're too busy with other work
1) Templar shouldn't be giving a contract to someone that can't do it.
2) Artist shouldn't have that kind of attitude; if they got asked to do it is because they were the best one for the job (or the only PC available?)
3) This should never, ever, ever be an issue; the reward should always be worth the risk and also be enough to cover expenses
4) Not being able to refuse is not the same as not being able to delay or negotiate details.
On point number 2.
What if the artist is an elf?
On stealing from elven roleplay...
" If an elf sees something that belongs to someone else, and provides moderate challenge for them, they want to take it - simply for the sake of taking it."
An elf seeing something and wanting to take it because it provides a moderate challenge for them is their cultural mindset.
An elf getting a task to do something they already do as part of their cultural mindset (stealing) might well seem like a kind of theft:
QuoteTo an elf, theft is: "Taking anything that would not be given if the possessor knew all of the facts."
The elf is taking money from an unknown benefactor through the templarate. The unknown benefactor may not even know they are getting an elven artist...and if they did know all of the facts, do you really think they'd want an ELF handling their task, regardless of what it is? Probably not. So in that regard, the elf should be pleased as punch. However, an elf will more than likely never make it to Master level, just like an elven bard might not make it past the rank of Seeker--at those higher levels, EVERYONE is expected to abandon loyalty to anything but the greater good of their Circle or the City.
QuoteSimilar questions are springing to mind now.
What if the only artist available for a certain task isn't human?
A dwarf with a focus to work around. An elf with a tribe to work around.
The dwarf and the elf PCs both chose this path with this in mind, therefore they're responsible for the difficulty of the roleplay involved. I'm not sure what you're referring to exactly...if a dwarf has a focus, that affects their life completely, to be sure...but unless becoming an artist is against their focus or would impact it negatively, I doubt that is a problem. Yes, an elf may have a tribe, but an elf with a tribe may still do work at the lower and middle levels of artistry without working against their tribe (in this case that'd be their "patron").
I hope that covers your questions.
Quote from: Blur on September 27, 2013, 07:17:08 PM
I rather not see legionnaires be able to be shadow artists too. It just feels too unfair.
However, considering what I have seen in the past those may just be my feelings.
That's not explicitly stated but generally that is expected to be the case based on what we have been talking about on staff side. Legion soldiers are fairly exempt from the system and also have some amount of criminal immunity. Since we can't (with current code) easily turn that on and off, it's best to find IC reason to restrict them from the system and instead use them to police it under the guidance of their templar and military rank overlords.
That might change, but that is what we are looking at now.
Quote from: janeshephard on September 27, 2013, 08:39:32 PM
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 03:12:58 PM
Quote from: janeshephard on September 27, 2013, 01:56:21 PM
Yes. I'd rather they were kept in the dark but only stepped in to check licensing when they suspect the rules were broken, than to make them always agree to contracts. I'll be frank. I think you'll see a steep drop in artistry if they get turned into automaton that must accept every contract their offered.
I'll be frank, too...I doubt that it can get much lower or less utilized than it is now. I'm willing to accept that if that turns out to be the case and adjust it farther down the road.
I like that you realize this. Can I open a request to northern staff and address this point with some IC information?
Thanks.
Sure, I don't see why not. I realize it because I've played it in the past, but I also realize it because I staff it and we can see the amount of use it has (or the frustrations people have with using it, whether they know we see it or not).
Quote
Quote from: hyzhenhok on September 27, 2013, 07:35:04 PM
It's all been very playable ever since crimcode was disabled at night years ago. Once you play around with it a bit and figure out what you can and can't get away with, it's very doable.
I -totally- did not know crim code was disabled at night. Is this even true?
Not quite all the way true. There are some changes that have been made that make it more likely for crime to succeed at night, though. Someone has probably already provided you with the answer in a later post, I'm going through questions chronologically.
Pros of the New System
- The united templar system means that you don't need to find a Lirathan to ask
- It makes use of social status, which will encourage PC to PC interaction
- It covers more then just assassination--And highlights other options to just assassination
The first is nothing except good, since being able to find any templar means that there's more opportunity to use the system. It means that if the Lirathan templars (or templar, if there's only one) don't play during your timezone, you're not out of luck. It also gives the former Jihaens ways to interact other then going out and fighting shit. Actually, I think the united order system means that the system will just work better--You can do a lot more with the same number of Faithful PCs.
The second I also am fond of. Tuluk is a strange place, where nobles and commoners can sit at the bar together and chat, but despite that, they are all very much aware of their place in society. This Shadow Artist system will further emphasize the social standing aspect of Tuluk, which I think is sometimes overlooked. We definitely need a rank chart before the system can go in, though. I mention that below.
The final bullet point I think is really worth nothing. Ideally, this system will be used also for smaller things. It would be interesting if Tuluk culture also had a "warning" system, where you did X, Y, and Z to get someone to change their ways before shrugging and killing them. This might be unofficial, but I think showing your power (perhaps anonymously) by messing with people could be really good.
Cons of the New System
- Shadow artists cannot refuse contracts
- Concerns about if Templars can impartially run a system against their own pets
- Concerns about why patroning a shadow artist is wise, if they will eventually grow beyond the patron's control
- Concerns about how newbies can train and how to make the system more newbie-friendly
To be fair, the concern about templars is probably something that impacts the system presently. Since as-is, they're still the ones running the system. This system isn't going to worsen things in that regard at all. I do think seeing more convincing reasons that Templars follow the new system honestly (other then coin) would be good.
Potential solutions, ideas, and unresolved stuff
- Potentially make a buy-out for contracts so Shadow Artists can rarely refuse, but have consequences
- How do Shadow Artists advance? Is it something thrust upon them, or do they have to actively seek it? Can they refuse advancement, and are there consequences if they do?
- Potentially patroning shadow artists can work very well, if you hire all mid-level ones to work together on higher contracts
- How does the patroning of the Shadow Artists work, and is short term patronage an assets or feature?
- Are there consequences to keep Templars honest with the system? What sort of checks do they have?
- How will Shadow Artist Legionnaires operate under the system?
(Edited to add a point about newbies)
I think the idea of an overhaul is a fine one. However, it begs the question: Why bother? The main movers and shakers have been the same couple for well over a real-time year, and their conflicts are the exact same conflicts they've been for the entire time. Granted - they're played well. But if all you're going to see is Noble's Aide #92 get assassinated, while Bard #994.a sings yet another song insulting Chosen Doodah's shoe-size, and the ninth GMH family member to overcharge the templar's favorite Legionairre again gets his Master Crafter's apartment robbed - well then nothing is changing. The results are the same. A whole lot of overhauling for basically nothing.
The only difference is, there might be more "official shadow artists" committing the crimes, and fewer "unlicensed criminals" doing it. Licensed or unlicensed, the same job is being done, the same results, the same effort.
Also, I think that the whole "pranking and insulting" end of contractual agreements with Shadow Artists needs to be - not the perview of Shadow Artists at all. That lies squarely upon the shoulders of the Bards of Tuluk and I'm guessing the Master Bards would not take kindly to having their toes stepped on by some first-rank Templar's pet prankster.
If you were to do away with the bardic circles entirely, then that'd change my opinion of that particular aspect of the docs. If you took that aspect away from the bardic circles, and left them otherwise intact, I feel it would turn them into nothing more than rank entertainers with an iso apartment house. So I don't think retconning the bardic circles would be a viable choice. But without making that choice, you still leave that part of the new overhaul stepping over the line into Bardic territory.
Quote from: Blur on September 27, 2013, 06:08:37 PM
It always felt like playing an unlicensed criminal was almost similar to trying to play a defiler in the middle of the city. Doable but probably not for very long. Both for similar reasons.
Things be changing more than advertised?
The best I can offer is a maybe.
Based on feedback here, I for one have seen some people (hyzenhok) that have pointed out the advantages afforded to those that might choose to play
criminal criminals--that is, criminals that do not want to stay inside the happy little box that Tuluk has constructed for them. Jherlen and maybe a couple of others (sorry if I don't remember your names) have pointed out that they really want to have the opportunity to do other criminal work. Even if all we do is define that there might be an unspoken black-market-style, off-the-books sort of "crime" out there--the kind that would get stamped out, punished severely, or monitored closely, depending on climate--it opens the door for some consideration that may not have occurred before.
Quote from: hyzhenhok on September 28, 2013, 12:29:12 PM
The system is broken, not just underutilized. Under the current system Templars have the ability to act as proxies and give contracts to licensed thieves and assassins, and I seriously doubt the reason it isn't used is that nobody has thought to try it.
The current "system" needs more than one person to "think to try it." It needs a critical mass of contracting agents and "shadow artists" to know the system exists and to know the expectations for their roles. There's no documentation in place right now to support the current "system" so IMO that critical mass has never been reached.
Quote from: hyzhenhok on September 28, 2013, 12:29:12 PM
The problem is the templars cannot reliably deliver the service, because the licensed artists currently owe nothing to the templarate after they get their license. Instead they become loyal servants of X leader PC, and of course nobody outside of X leader has any real chance of hiring them to do something cool.
Maybe this is the cause of the under utilization of the current "system." Maybe the templarate has TONS of contracts for jobs but when they try to get PCs to do them they're constantly rebuffed. I don't get that impression. I've been in a place to IC'ly see requests for "shadow artists" to do jobs and I just haven't seen any requests made over a matter of... a long time. Maybe the templarate just assumes that they'd be turned down before they ever ask? That's different than the "shadow artists" refusing because they're loyal servants.
When you played a clanned "shadow artist" did you have a bunch of requests for jobs that you turned down because you were clanned?
Quote from: hyzhenhok on September 28, 2013, 12:29:12 PM
And why would X leader ever risk trying to hire someone outside of their House for risky, potentially embarrassing jobs?
I have to agree with janeshephard here:
Quote from: janeshephard on September 28, 2013, 12:34:01 PM
I would hire people outside my House to do stuff so it doesn't lead back to me.
Quote from: hyzhenhok on September 28, 2013, 12:39:34 PM
Really? Even when every other skilled, licensed artist is already employed by another House or organization?
Yes really. If the templarate hires a skilled, licensed artist outside my clan or even from a rival clan, that artist still won't know it was me who initiated the contract.
Quote from: hyzhenhok on September 28, 2013, 12:29:12 PM
The end result is shadow artists rarely if ever get contracts; they just become another type of house servant. Which is boring.
What if it's a clan that has your "shadow artist" doing lots of "shadow artisty" things? Is it still boring?
Quote from: hyzhenhok on September 28, 2013, 12:29:12 PM
These new docs succeed in a few very important things:
- Opportunity cost for artists to get licensed. Paying some coins for a license has never been a significant cost. Requiring licensed artists to do jobs when called upon in exchange for state sanction? Now there's an interesting trade-off.
I agree that there should be an expectation that licensed "shadow artists" will do contracts outside their clan or patronage for the good of Tuluk and because if they refuse too much that makes baby Utep cry. I think if that expectation were documented publicly then we'd see more "shadow artist" PCs playing that way because it's fun. I personally trust the playerbase in this. 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.
Also, if you think that paying coins for a license is not enough of an opportunity cost right now, what do you think about the opportunity costs in the new system for contracting agents? Under the new docs, if you want to kill someone at or below your social status the only opportunity cost is paying coins. Because of the stack of mandates in the new documents there is no other risk other than having to pay out of pocket.
Quote from: hyzhenhok on September 28, 2013, 12:29:12 PM
These new docs succeed in a few very important things:
- Shadow artists are required to work more closely with the templarate, so the templarate can get a much clearer picture of who is capable of what. It's all well and good to say they can already serve as middlemen, but to be frank, I bet most templars never see an artist again after they license them.
If templars never see artist PCs after they're licensed, maybe it's because there's no demand for the templars to find those artist PCs because players have been unaware of the current "system" that permits contracting agents to go to the templarate to anonymously find a "shadow artist" to do sneaky jobs?
Maybe all that's needed is some public documentation of a true system including expectations, and a good faith effort by the players?
I don't much like it, except for the change in tattoo. I do like the idea of a new tattoo that embelishents are added to, to show your skill.
other then that, I don't lik the rest of the changes. or at least, how they read.
Quote from: Fredd on September 28, 2013, 01:35:59 PM
I don't much like it, except for the change in tattoo. I do like the idea of a new tattoo that embelishents are added to, to show your skill.
other then that, I don't lik the rest of the changes. or at least, how they read.
Why? What specific parts don't you like?
I don't like some parts too, but if you say which parts bother you, it's more helpful feedback for staff.
I don't like Tuluk. Let's get this straight. I'll never use this system, probably, ever. I avoid being based in Tuluk like I avoid drunk drivers.
With that said, this whole idea sounds cool as hell. If it fails, tweak it, because it's Fing cool. Tuluk has always been painted as a place of artists. This seriously makes that a forefront. It also gives Tuluk a hyper-communist feel, which to me, fits right in with that place. I don't know that I liked the Templar Orders disappearing, but at the same time, I do - just don't make them Allanaki Templars (because that's blasphemy) because the stuff that Tuluki Templars are known for makes them Tuluki Templars. If anything, tone them down, don't tone them out.
But this isn't about them. It's about the Shadow Artists. And yeah, I think this whole thing really fits in with Tuluk as a whole. Making the system more ritualized and public in terms of its existence is the right thing to do.
And gawddam, I don't think I've ever seen a staff member be so apparent. It works wonders in terms of feeling like the odd gap between staff and players doesn't exist. I also think it's the right thing to do, so congrats Nyr. Congrats on both your willingness to speak to the players about this huge thing, and your work in implementing everything you have to get this shift headed in the right direction.
I dig it.
Quote from: Nyr on September 28, 2013, 01:27:30 PM
Based on feedback here, I for one have seen some people (hyzenhok) that have pointed out the advantages afforded to those that might choose to play criminal criminals--that is, criminals that do not want to stay inside the happy little box that Tuluk has constructed for them. Jherlen and maybe a couple of others (sorry if I don't remember your names) have pointed out that they really want to have the opportunity to do other criminal work. Even if all we do is define that there might be an unspoken black-market-style, off-the-books sort of "crime" out there--the kind that would get stamped out, punished severely, or monitored closely, depending on climate--it opens the door for some consideration that may not have occurred before.
Nyr, an important question here is: Does Tuluk have more unlicensed crimes, than licensed and registered shadow art work? If it does have more unlicensed crime I would think things wouldn't be so 'happy' in Tuluk since its traditions have not caught on to a large extent.
Consequently, if
criminal criminals make up a larger group than licensed shadow artists and agents, the average Tuluki won't care as much about the bullshit laws that the few of higher status -appear- to follow. And they would appear to follow them if they want to keep the caste structure in place.
Quote from: Nyr on September 28, 2013, 12:37:03 PM
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)?
I'd be interested in taking a look.
Quote from: Sayyadina on September 28, 2013, 01:40:56 AM
So the current "system" has failed and seemingly needs to be replaced with a new system that is stacked full of mandates to force more use of the new system compared to the current "system." However, I think this is based on a false assumption that the current "system" isn't working because of a lack of mandates. I think the current "system" doesn't work because no one knows about it! I'll bet that the majority of posters in the thread were unaware that templars can currently confidentially broker contracts between an agent and a "shadow artist." I didn't know until fairly recently. So is the failure of the current "system" one of design or of implementation? There are no detailed public documents about the current "system," even. Of course it won't work.
http://www.armageddon.org/help/view/Tuluki%20Roleplay
Quote
Law and Order in Tuluk:
Some time ago, a law won the Triumvirate majority for the reinstatement of an old Tuluki custom: licensed thievery and assassination.
Thievery and assassination:
Thieves and assassins (by trade, not coded guild) are required to register with a member of the Templarate prior to conducting theft or an assassination. The templar records this information in the License Registry: the individual's name, description, organization (if any), legal occupation (if any), thief or assassin, the recording templar's name and the record date. (For example: "Jonah, a tall human male with blue eyes and brown hair, knife-maker of House Salarr, registers as assassin, recorded by Faithful Lady Janis, 168th day of the Descending Sun, year 59 of the 20th Age.")
Thieves
A thief is charged a one-time registration fee of 300 obsidian. Registered thieves are still expected to operate with enough wisdom and skill not to get caught; after all, this law is a rebirth of the appreciation of high expertise in Old Tuluk. If a registered thief is caught, however, she may be let off with a warning, or receive a lessened penalty, at the templar's discretion (conscientious PC templars may wish to make this clear to the thief). Needless to say, registered thieves may also receive paying jobs from the templarate.
Assassins
An assassin registers for free, but must purchase a separate "license" for each assassination. A license is not a tangible object, but rather a pledge from the templarate not to act on the findings of an investigation - provided the crime has been committed as recorded, and executed with skill and discretion.
Definitive and in-depth, no, but if you read Tuluki docs, it's there at least.
Quote
IMO "shadow artists" are currently underutilized not because they're refusing jobs or they're overly loyal, but because most players are oblivious and uncertain about what the current "system" is and what the expectations are for their roles, especially for contracting agents and "shadow artists." This uncertainty might manifest as reluctance or excess loyalty, but those are symptoms and not causes.
Isn't that sort of a chicken or egg argument? "It's not that people are reluctant to work or too loyal to their patrons, it's that they don't know that they are supposed to be invested in the 'system' and should be more loyal to the 'system.'" Defining the documentation and laying out guidelines should put us in a good position to later (if deemed necessary) loosen up restrictions. Again, it's easier to move from more strict to less strict than vice versa.
Quote
The new documentation is stacked full of mandates for the contracting agent, for the templars, and for the "shadow artists," and it looks to me that the mandates are the biggest source of concern for those responding in this thread. I know those many mandates are my biggest personal concern.
The overall gist of it probably is not going to change. Some parts of it might be tweaked based on feedback. Removing all of them is more than likely not going to happen.
Quote
So those of us that are concerned are being asked to trust in the new documents and to give it a shot:
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 04:34:14 PM
Quote from: Ouroboros on September 27, 2013, 03:56:00 PM
No, what I'm saying is that we can accept that players are biased as a whole, and instead of pretending it isn't the case, recognize it, minimize it where we can, and balance it where we can't so that at least the playing field is level from an OOC standpoint.
I don't think we're pretending it isn't the case that players can be biased. I think we're asking that players play above that and roleplay since it's the first rule of the game. If it doesn't work or seems horrible to play, we can change it, but I'd rather give the playerbase the opportunity to try something out that is different rather than just assume "well...this will never work because players can't handle it."
But I think what many of us are asking is to be trusted in our roleplay to try out a documented system of "shadow artistry" without all the mandates, and in response we're being told "this will never work because players can't handle it" without mandates.
We're already seeing it not work because of the lack of restriction, so we're adding more restriction to it.
Quote
However, if the mandate-heavy system is implemented and we see increased utilization, how will we know whether the increased utilization is due to the mandates or due to the mere fact that we finally have a publicly documented system that everyone involved knows about and understands?
The fact that artists are pretty much tied to patrons is what we think breaks the system now. We're going with that theory. If it works, we can always adjust it IC later on to allow more manipulation here and there. If it doesn't work, we can also adjust it IC later on to do whatever is deemed necessary.
Quote from: Molten Heart on September 28, 2013, 01:17:01 PM
The greatest obstacle to the whole "Shadow Artist System" is the unavailability or lack of capable shadow artists. In a system where failure is the only way to learn and failure is illegal.... that seems to be a problem. If there were some system or organization that helped to cultivate and develop young shadow artist talent, I Think that alone would go a long way to helping develop the art of crime in Tuluk. The documentation is great and people can argue about the finer details of the organization until they are blue int he face, but if the role of the shadow artist is too difficult and/or unrewarding, people just won't play those roles.
Good point.
I don't like that Artists are not allowed to refuse contracts. I don't like that they can't refuse contracts even if they are employed and life sworn to there employer.
So, for example. I have a nice Kassigargh Noble. I find myself a good artist, and help him grow up to be very skilled, in secret. For my own use. I offer them a life oath, and they take it.
How the doc's are written, a templar can then contract my Artist to kill my own aide, and they cannot refuse, even though they are sworn to my house for there life.
That's one.
I need to go back over an reread the things said about stealing, just to make sure i don't put a foot in my mouth.
I do want to state that my favorite thing to play on arm is a stealth type pc. And i love playing them in Tuluk. I honestly hope staff will listen to concerns.
Quote from: Fredd on September 28, 2013, 01:49:05 PM
I don't like that Artists are not allowed to refuse contracts. I don't like that they can't refuse contracts even if they are employed and life sworn to there employer.
So, for example. I have a nice Kassigargh Noble. I find myself a good artist, and help him grow up to be very skilled, in secret. For my own use. I offer them a life oath, and they take it.
How the doc's are written, a templar can then contract my Artist to kill my own aide, and they cannot refuse, even though they are sworn to my house for there life.
It's something that a lot of people (myself included) have commented on. The solution staff offers seems to be that you don't
have to be a Master level Shadow Artist. You can stay at the middle level and keep working for your Chosen just fine, without being hired to work against them.
What is currently lacking is a clear understanding of how Shadow Artists progress in rank, which I think is a key point for people with concerns similar to yours.
Quote from: Outrider on September 28, 2013, 08:07:55 AM
I'll admit up front to not having deeply read the full 10 pages (though I plan to work through that).
I'll also start out by expressing gratitude to Nyr for giving this discussion the attention it has received.
While I don't yet know if I like the proposed change - I agree that there is need. If for nothing else than to quell the desperately OOC "rarr! thief!" rage that leeches into IC play.
Some initial gut reactions:
* For existing accomplished master (not necessarily Master) thiefses, resplendent in licenses and exquisite in ability I would hope there would either be a type of grandfathering in of PCs who have been developed under radically different circumstances and expectations or some other way of "opting out" of the new system without too many character-ending consequences.
That's planned, yes. If you're already in the artist system as a PC, you'll be brought into the fold of the new system by your own choice or leave it with no problems by your own choice in-game.
Quote
^As an addition to that, my hope is that this would be introduced as a new thing going forward in Tuluk rather than a retcon. I think I did pick up on it being the former, though, in one of the scan-throughs.
Correct.
Quote
* While I read in several places of the documents guiding templars, I have played this game too long to have much faith in the power of documentation to guide positions of power. Even my experience with the existing system has had me in some rather head-scratching situations wondering if I was reading the same docs.
Well, documentation and staff. I mean it's not like we're going to just trust the documentation to keep templars working, we also assist and respond to their needs/or problems. Documentation is no replacement for staff oversight, it's just a big help.
Quote
* 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.
Quote
* It is hard to play a burg/pickpkt/ass well. A new look at the guidelines & practices of licensed skullduggery is welcomed. Knee-jerk reaction to change like this is bound to be negative. . . I'm going to simmer in this sauce a bit more, read Nyr's responses a little deeper, and see what positive feelings bubble up.
It certainly is. In the docs it refers to working with a patron, and that's a pretty important part of the process. At the lower levels, you might find that you NEED a patron to get by, because they have an Estate or a nice apartment to keep you entertained (or to practice certain skills in covertly). If you want to avoid having a patron and want to go it alone, you might have to find other means of practice. Given that the templarate would know the roster of artists, they might be given the authority to have one artist train another if both parties are interested/or otherwise unencumbered by partisanship. We'll be looking at ways to help that situation.
I wonder if now is the time to address my concern that it sounds like all it takes is a furious skill grind to rise up quickly in social status as a Shadow Artist, whereas everyone else in every walk of life be they bards, artists, social peons would take ten times longer to achieve the same social rank and caste. I'm hoping there's much more to the elevation in status than "Wow, that guy can one hit backstab people!" because that would be seriously very shitty to the Seeker Konviwedu who has been around a couple years, performing at every "contest" and roleplaying their ass off. Just popped into my head, but I think I saw it referenced somewhere in these ten pages...I too am curious how one goes up and down in rank and how it plays to a career of Shadow Artistry.
It seems more like the artists are more loyal to the templar's, then those that they serve. Like, those are there true employers. And that shouldn't be. Up until these docs come you, it's considered a great thing for an employer to have a suspected master artist in there employ. It would be more of a liability if these doc's are made canon.
Patrons, especially Noble patrons, should always have final say on the work there artist does. They are the one's that feed, water, train, and take responsibility if the Artist's actions come to light. And while it is absolutely fine to say that the Noble should report the artists work to a templar (after all, that's how they know the work was liscensed or not) I don't think the artsists should be under such direct control of the templars.
Quote from: Law&Order on September 28, 2013, 11:53:00 AM
Quote from: Nyr on September 27, 2013, 10:17:09 AM
Quote6. If this system is going to be reliant on status and power brokers willing to take the chances, isn't it perhaps time to open up the Surif on a much broader level than is currently being seen in Tuluk?
Frankly, we've been running full steam since an HRPT 2 months ago; we can't change everything overnight even if we do have plans. Yes. It would be nice to have another Surif noble, and we'll put up a call, but it might be a bit longer.
I respect that stance of it being necessary to get the bigger pieces in place for the HRPT so the trickle down changes can happen, but there's a major flaw in the "system" be it a new one or an old one, when the positions of influence to guide and direct the system aren't in place, the system will fail because of lack of interest. This has been referenced previously, http://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php?PHPSESSID=cvdf0m5gtnt0eboih29131qus2&topic=46143.msg776056#msg776056 (http://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php?PHPSESSID=cvdf0m5gtnt0eboih29131qus2&topic=46143.msg776056#msg776056) and as a player who has come and gone and come back to playing in Tuluk, we'll say over the last three years, all there really is present is "more of the same". And I'm not casting doubt on the players who are already there guiding things socially, but there comes a time when new blood is necessary. I won't say that I've seen all of the attempts to sprinkle new blood into the shark infested waters, but the few I have seen have had almost no longevity and activity, which damages any credibility that a system in place might have. It's simply impossible to get your footing for the new or old systems without the bedrock to build off of, and in this case, the bedrock is a decent number of active nobles, representation from regular playing GMH and yes, templars.
Right, like I said, it's only been two months, we've done a lot, we're doing more, we'll get new blood in. Hold your horses. :)
Quote
I think that the old system, largely unknown and untalked about, so therefore underutilized, would have been fine had there been someone pushing it from behind the scenes, and the new system could be equally promising in the same contest, but without the people who work the puppet strings, nobody will want to play puppets. Lack of information (DOCS!) and direction (VIP Characters) make any and all systems flawed and hard to play in. So making up an entirely new system that puts more power into a few pcs, in this case templars, it still doesn't fix the root issue for any changes that will be put into place in Tuluk, and that is....
Nobody will care if it's Noble House A vs Noble House B again, for three straight years, so there will be very few bards in the City, since there are few options on who to impress, and with fewer bards there will be fewer people pissed off by said bards, and with fewer GMH representatives who have longevity and vested interest in the City, there are fewer venues for lower ranked players to get jobs from, which keeps them from spending in the markets, crafting, foraging, buying things from PC traders, and yes...having things that other people want to kill, steal and burgle for...which makes Shadow Artists pointless since they would otherwise only be doing...the exact same thing they are doing now in the new system, except being told to do it by templarate middle-(wo)men. Which leaves a game which is turning out a higher who list than it has ever seen before with one of it's two MAJOR centers of virtual population floundering...with a shiny, new system that ends up looking just as uninteresting and flawed as the previous one.
Maybe I've been talking just to myself here, but yes, we have plans to do more, we are going to open up another noble call, and we are going to work on the rest of the documentation for the city. I don't know what else you want here. I get it, you don't like the system and you didn't like it before and you wanted it to be changed in a different way than what we are doing. We're going to disagree on that point, then.
Quote
Don't micromanage the system and put barriers and restrictions in place to streamline something that wasn't really broken, just underutilized.
It was broken. We may disagree, but we on staff think it was broken.
QuoteThe HRPT's are shaking things up from the top down...why not make the bold statement of shaking things in the middle a bit too?
That's what we're doing. Maybe not both at the same time but artists and those that should want to hire them and their prospective victims are definitely part of the middle.
Quote from: Law&Order on September 28, 2013, 01:59:01 PM
I wonder if now is the time to address my concern that it sounds like all it takes is a furious skill grind to rise up quickly in social status as a Shadow Artist, whereas everyone else in every walk of life be they bards, artists, social peons would take ten times longer to achieve the same social rank and caste. I'm hoping there's much more to the elevation in status than "Wow, that guy can one hit backstab people!" because that would be seriously very shitty to the Seeker Konviwedu who has been around a couple years, performing at every "contest" and roleplaying their ass off. Just popped into my head, but I think I saw it referenced somewhere in these ten pages...I too am curious how one goes up and down in rank and how it plays to a career of Shadow Artistry.
An artists rank has nothing to do with there actual skill levels. I've had Artists with midling skill levels do Master level work. It's realy about Rp, planning, creativity, and not getting caught. Granted, coded skills help you not get caught. But there is always more then one way of doing things, and usually, the one that's 100% hard coded, is the most unsafe.
Quote from: ShaLeah on September 28, 2013, 12:26:07 PM
Quote from: Patuk on September 28, 2013, 12:18:10 PM
You know, for a city where people live much longer than in Allanak, I'm not entirely certain if a lack of people and longevity is the problem here.
Then what is it then? Is making the system even harder and less welcoming to enjoy the answer?
I'd love it if there were more shadow artists, or usage thereof, it should be a relatively easy process and I think it's so ICly restrictive and OOCly unappealing that if getting more active shadow artists is the goal, the changes will not make that happen. They would be better shadow artists though, so I can see the appeal of that.
Existing shadow artists (should they stay on as such after this change) will find more to do. We'll also have more sponsored role calls in Tuluk, giving them more higher-ranking people to get stuff to work from. It's not going to magickally fix things overnight and it may need more tweaking, and after this weekend and during next week, it will get more tweaking.
Quote from: Molten Heart on September 28, 2013, 01:17:01 PM
The greatest obstacle to the whole "Shadow Artist System" is the unavailability or lack of capable shadow artists. In a system where failure is the only way to learn and failure is illegal.... that seems to be a problem. If there were some system or organization that helped to cultivate and develop young shadow artist talent, I Think that alone would go a long way to helping develop the art of crime in Tuluk. The documentation is great and people can argue about the finer details of the organization until they are blue int he face, but if the role of the shadow artist is too difficult and/or unrewarding, people just won't play those roles.
Providing that training/cultivation in a non-cheesy way should be a goal in the city as a whole, and we'll see what we can do to make that more of a reality.
Quote from: Nyr on September 28, 2013, 02:06:55 PM
Quote from: ShaLeah on September 28, 2013, 12:26:07 PM
Quote from: Patuk on September 28, 2013, 12:18:10 PM
You know, for a city where people live much longer than in Allanak, I'm not entirely certain if a lack of people and longevity is the problem here.
Then what is it then? Is making the system even harder and less welcoming to enjoy the answer?
I'd love it if there were more shadow artists, or usage thereof, it should be a relatively easy process and I think it's so ICly restrictive and OOCly unappealing that if getting more active shadow artists is the goal, the changes will not make that happen. They would be better shadow artists though, so I can see the appeal of that.
Existing shadow artists (should they stay on as such after this change) will find more to do. We'll also have more sponsored role calls in Tuluk, giving them more higher-ranking people to get stuff to work from. It's not going to magickally fix things overnight and it may need more tweaking, and after this weekend and during next week, it will get more tweaking.
More sponsored roles in Tuluk... I shall be waiting good sir.
That being said. I still think Patrons should have final say on there employees Shadow Work. And in all honesty, this gives a very tangible benefit to being an Artist with an actual patron.
Quote from: Lizzie on September 28, 2013, 01:26:42 PM
I think the idea of an overhaul is a fine one. However, it begs the question: Why bother? The main movers and shakers have been the same couple for well over a real-time year, and their conflicts are the exact same conflicts they've been for the entire time. Granted - they're played well. But if all you're going to see is Noble's Aide #92 get assassinated, while Bard #994.a sings yet another song insulting Chosen Doodah's shoe-size, and the ninth GMH family member to overcharge the templar's favorite Legionairre again gets his Master Crafter's apartment robbed - well then nothing is changing. The results are the same. A whole lot of overhauling for basically nothing.
I think that if you think this, you're in for some interesting times in Tuluk in the future; this is only one facet of things and while it can be talked about freely due to how it is going to be implemented, plot-based stuff is going to just happen in-game.
Quote
The only difference is, there might be more "official shadow artists" committing the crimes, and fewer "unlicensed criminals" doing it. Licensed or unlicensed, the same job is being done, the same results, the same effort.
I guess we'll see how it works, then!
Quote
Also, I think that the whole "pranking and insulting" end of contractual agreements with Shadow Artists needs to be - not the perview of Shadow Artists at all. That lies squarely upon the shoulders of the Bards of Tuluk and I'm guessing the Master Bards would not take kindly to having their toes stepped on by some first-rank Templar's pet prankster.
Bards tend to prank and insult in a way that is different from property damage and leaving a scrab head in someone's bed as a warning or threat.
Quote
If you were to do away with the bardic circles entirely, then that'd change my opinion of that particular aspect of the docs. If you took that aspect away from the bardic circles, and left them otherwise intact, I feel it would turn them into nothing more than rank entertainers with an iso apartment house. So I don't think retconning the bardic circles would be a viable choice. But without making that choice, you still leave that part of the new overhaul stepping over the line into Bardic territory.
Probably not that much. Again, bards have never been used to this end. They want to be KNOWN for their pranks, not unknown for striking terror in the heart of an enemy. Not saying a bard can't be an artist or vice versa (in fact it'd make an interesting amount of personal roleplay) but they have two different interests.
Quote from: Nyr on September 28, 2013, 02:02:44 PM
QuoteRight, like I said, it's only been two months, we've done a lot, we're doing more, we'll get new blood in. Hold your horses. :)
I recognized you were doing a lot, I was simply pointing out that it's also about what has been done as well as what will be done. My horses are quite held, I'm just trying to offer a point of view on what I think it will take to help make things work, which I thought was the point of opening up the discussion. No harm, no foul there.
Quote
Maybe I've been talking just to myself here, but yes, we have plans to do more, we are going to open up another noble call, and we are going to work on the rest of the documentation for the city. I don't know what else you want here. I get it, you don't like the system and you didn't like it before and you wanted it to be changed in a different way than what we are doing. We're going to disagree on that point, then.
I never actually said I don't like the system, new or old, and that I am demanding changes. I'm simply stating that, my opinion is, that in order for it to work, you're going to need it to happen with people who can facilitate it, rather than a small army of newly inked pick pockets and hitmen. Ten pages makes it clear you're not talking just to yourself, but there are quite a few people with vested interest in current and future character concepts who take some pride in knowing what they are doing. Any changes made for the better and playability are always going to be for the greater good, no matter what levels of dissent there are or hurt feelings. It's about a tune up on a twenty some year old engine. These things have to happen to keep it alive, and I respect the work that's going into it. Please don't try to decide what my opinion is on something based on questions I have or reservations I have with a situation as it is currently and the recent history that I've seen. I do believe this system can work and work well, I just worry about how well it will function under the setup as it is.
QuoteIt was broken. We may disagree, but we on staff think it was broken.
I agree that the current setup is quite broken and not working correctly and as I stated earlier, I do see the need for the change.
QuoteThat's what we're doing. Maybe not both at the same time but artists and those that should want to hire them and their prospective victims are definitely part of the middle.
As someone who appreciates the social climbing aspect of the game, I appreciate the work and effort going into that and look forward to seeing the changes happen. I just hope that there's enough player resources available to really make it flourish.
Quote from: Nyr on September 28, 2013, 02:10:03 PM
Quote from: Molten Heart on September 28, 2013, 01:17:01 PM
The greatest obstacle to the whole "Shadow Artist System" is the unavailability or lack of capable shadow artists. In a system where failure is the only way to learn and failure is illegal.... that seems to be a problem. If there were some system or organization that helped to cultivate and develop young shadow artist talent, I Think that alone would go a long way to helping develop the art of crime in Tuluk. The documentation is great and people can argue about the finer details of the organization until they are blue int he face, but if the role of the shadow artist is too difficult and/or unrewarding, people just won't play those roles.
Providing that training/cultivation in a non-cheesy way should be a goal in the city as a whole, and we'll see what we can do to make that more of a reality.
I suggest the Malik Fizz School of Gardening and Etiquette.
Quote from: The7DeadlyVenomz on September 28, 2013, 01:40:12 PM
I don't like Tuluk. Let's get this straight. I'll never use this system, probably, ever. I avoid being based in Tuluk like I avoid drunk drivers.
With that said, this whole idea sounds cool as hell. If it fails, tweak it, because it's Fing cool. Tuluk has always been painted as a place of artists. This seriously makes that a forefront. It also gives Tuluk a hyper-communist feel, which to me, fits right in with that place. I don't know that I liked the Templar Orders disappearing, but at the same time, I do - just don't make them Allanaki Templars (because that's blasphemy) because the stuff that Tuluki Templars are known for makes them Tuluki Templars. If anything, tone them down, don't tone them out.
But this isn't about them. It's about the Shadow Artists. And yeah, I think this whole thing really fits in with Tuluk as a whole. Making the system more ritualized and public in terms of its existence is the right thing to do.
And gawddam, I don't think I've ever seen a staff member be so apparent. It works wonders in terms of feeling like the odd gap between staff and players doesn't exist. I also think it's the right thing to do, so congrats Nyr. Congrats on both your willingness to speak to the players about this huge thing, and your work in implementing everything you have to get this shift headed in the right direction.
I dig it.
Thanks, I appreciate it, even if you don't like Tuluk :)
Quote from: Fredd on September 28, 2013, 02:02:55 PM
An artists rank has nothing to do with there actual skill levels. I've had Artists with midling skill levels do Master level work. It's realy about Rp, planning, creativity, and not getting caught. Granted, coded skills help you not get caught. But there is always more then one way of doing things, and usually, the one that's 100% hard coded, is the most unsafe.
Sure, in the previous system...but you gotta have the skills to get paid in this new one. Until there's sub-contracting and less code specific Artistry worked out in these contract docs, that's how it kind of looks.
There's already more then a couple places to go to be trained in the shadow arts. I wont say more. You can find them ICly if you look.
Quote from: janeshephard on September 28, 2013, 01:41:02 PM
Quote from: Nyr on September 28, 2013, 01:27:30 PM
Based on feedback here, I for one have seen some people (hyzenhok) that have pointed out the advantages afforded to those that might choose to play criminal criminals--that is, criminals that do not want to stay inside the happy little box that Tuluk has constructed for them. Jherlen and maybe a couple of others (sorry if I don't remember your names) have pointed out that they really want to have the opportunity to do other criminal work. Even if all we do is define that there might be an unspoken black-market-style, off-the-books sort of "crime" out there--the kind that would get stamped out, punished severely, or monitored closely, depending on climate--it opens the door for some consideration that may not have occurred before.
Nyr, an important question here is: Does Tuluk have more unlicensed crimes, than licensed and registered shadow art work? If it does have more unlicensed crime I would think things wouldn't be so 'happy' in Tuluk since its traditions have not caught on to a large extent.
Are you saying PC-wise or virtually? If you mean PC-wise should I include Tuluki newbies that suicide on guards or that like to spamsteal their way around the city like it's snatch-n-grab sorta MUD?
Quote
Consequently, if criminal criminals make up a larger group than licensed shadow artists and agents, the average Tuluki won't care as much about the bullshit laws that the few of higher status -appear- to follow. And they would appear to follow them if they want to keep the caste structure in place.
I guess you mean virtually. Given that this is tradition and law and enforced by the templarate, I would think that the majority work within that system. The minority probably couldn't or shouldn't be disclosed except as an estimate if/when that comes up.
Quote from: Fredd on September 28, 2013, 01:49:05 PM
I don't like that Artists are not allowed to refuse contracts. I don't like that they can't refuse contracts even if they are employed and life sworn to there employer.
So, for example. I have a nice Kassigargh Noble. I find myself a good artist, and help him grow up to be very skilled, in secret. For my own use. I offer them a life oath, and they take it.
How the doc's are written, a templar can then contract my Artist to kill my own aide, and they cannot refuse, even though they are sworn to my house for there life.
No, they can't contract your artist to kill your own aide unless your artist is a Master, in which case it's your own fault as you took that risk. If you have lifesworn them, hopefully you've discussed something like "you swear your life to the House and that means you do NOT ever become a master artist or I will slit your throat myself...and then have your family eliminated by artists that are more loyal than you."
Quote from: Law&Order on September 28, 2013, 01:59:01 PM
I wonder if now is the time to address my concern that it sounds like all it takes is a furious skill grind to rise up quickly in social status as a Shadow Artist, whereas everyone else in every walk of life be they bards, artists, social peons would take ten times longer to achieve the same social rank and caste. I'm hoping there's much more to the elevation in status than "Wow, that guy can one hit backstab people!" because that would be seriously very shitty to the Seeker Konviwedu who has been around a couple years, performing at every "contest" and roleplaying their ass off.
Yes, we put all of this work into a system based around roleplay just to automatically raise people in rank based on their skill levels. ;)
Quote from: Law&Order on September 28, 2013, 02:18:55 PM
Quote from: Fredd on September 28, 2013, 02:02:55 PM
An artists rank has nothing to do with there actual skill levels. I've had Artists with midling skill levels do Master level work. It's realy about Rp, planning, creativity, and not getting caught. Granted, coded skills help you not get caught. But there is always more then one way of doing things, and usually, the one that's 100% hard coded, is the most unsafe.
Sure, in the previous system...but you gotta have the skills to get paid in this new one. Until there's sub-contracting and less code specific Artistry worked out in these contract docs, that's how it kind of looks.
From what I read, and Nyr please tell me if I'm wrong or not here, Gaining your ranks as an artist in the new system will be much like the last system. Your rank is essentially trust. You earn trust by taking and completing work successfully. And while hard coded skills will always help, they aren't the end all be all.
IE:
You get contracted to steal Corporal Amos of House Dasari's house guard's prized dagger.
A normal artist might pick it off his belt.
A master might follow them, learn that they are having a secret affair with someone, follow them to there place, take the dagger while they are having sex, and leave a much cheaper dagger in it's place. Leaving the person to suspect the person they are having an affair with of foul play.
Creativity is what makes a Master, not hard coded skills.
Quote from: Nyr on September 28, 2013, 02:10:03 PM
Quote from: Molten Heart on September 28, 2013, 01:17:01 PM
The greatest obstacle to the whole "Shadow Artist System" is the unavailability or lack of capable shadow artists. In a system where failure is the only way to learn and failure is illegal.... that seems to be a problem. If there were some system or organization that helped to cultivate and develop young shadow artist talent, I Think that alone would go a long way to helping develop the art of crime in Tuluk. The documentation is great and people can argue about the finer details of the organization until they are blue int he face, but if the role of the shadow artist is too difficult and/or unrewarding, people just won't play those roles.
Providing that training/cultivation in a non-cheesy way should be a goal in the city as a whole, and we'll see what we can do to make that more of a reality.
I hope staff would consider not just IC solutions but also game world design solutions.
Quote from: Barzalene on September 28, 2013, 02:17:19 PM
Quote from: Nyr on September 28, 2013, 02:10:03 PM
Quote from: Molten Heart on September 28, 2013, 01:17:01 PM
The greatest obstacle to the whole "Shadow Artist System" is the unavailability or lack of capable shadow artists. In a system where failure is the only way to learn and failure is illegal.... that seems to be a problem. If there were some system or organization that helped to cultivate and develop young shadow artist talent, I Think that alone would go a long way to helping develop the art of crime in Tuluk. The documentation is great and people can argue about the finer details of the organization until they are blue int he face, but if the role of the shadow artist is too difficult and/or unrewarding, people just won't play those roles.
Providing that training/cultivation in a non-cheesy way should be a goal in the city as a whole, and we'll see what we can do to make that more of a reality.
I suggest the Malik Fizz School of Gardening and Etiquette.
Personal I'm having visions of a Tuluki version of the Loyal (secret?) Order of the Water Buffalo, but that's probably too cheesy.
Quote from: Nyr on September 28, 2013, 02:24:25 PM
Quote from: Fredd on September 28, 2013, 01:49:05 PM
I don't like that Artists are not allowed to refuse contracts. I don't like that they can't refuse contracts even if they are employed and life sworn to there employer.
So, for example. I have a nice Kassigargh Noble. I find myself a good artist, and help him grow up to be very skilled, in secret. For my own use. I offer them a life oath, and they take it.
How the doc's are written, a templar can then contract my Artist to kill my own aide, and they cannot refuse, even though they are sworn to my house for there life.
No, they can't contract your artist to kill your own aide unless your artist is a Master, in which case it's your own fault as you took that risk. If you have lifesworn them, hopefully you've discussed something like "you swear your life to the House and that means you do NOT ever become a master artist or I will slit your throat myself...and then have your family eliminated by artists that are more loyal than you."
See, and that's what I feel is contrary to the feel of Tuluk. A Tuluki artist should always strive to Master whatever art they practice. This has always been the feel of Tuluk to me. Now it's like "I want you to get really good, but don' become the best. I don't want the best working for me."
This is just a wild guess, but...
I'm pretty sure that very, very few PCs will ever reach the Master level of Shadow Artists. This is comparable to how very few PCs make full Bard, which Nyr compared a little to Shadow Artists (http://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,46260.msg779151.html#msg779151). I think it's going to take IC years and years to get to the level of Master Shadow artist, and I suspect you will have had to pull off a lot of challenging jobs.
I would like to see official BETA docs on it, though. Nyr? Can we see those or are they secret/still being decided on?
Quote from: Fredd on September 28, 2013, 01:59:19 PM
It seems more like the artists are more loyal to the templar's, then those that they serve.
They are loyal to the city. Not the templars.
Quote
Like, those are there true employers.
But they aren't. The system or "the city" is their employer. It's contract work.
QuoteUp until these docs come you, it's considered a great thing for an employer to have a suspected master artist in there employ.
Up until the bardic docs were changed, it was considered marginally impossible for a player to achieve the rank of Masterbard and equally possible for a patron to employ that person directly. We fixed that by making the former possible and the latter impossible, thereby giving the social status to the individual, their dedication to their organization, and the ability for patrons to engage masterbards on single-use basis as needed.
Quote
Patrons, especially Noble patrons, should always have final say on the work there artist does.
We disagree.
QuoteThey are the one's that feed, water, train, and take responsibility if the Artist's actions come to light.
They definitely do the first few things, but they also would potentially get proceeds from whatever their artist does in the future. Also if their artist is working on an independent job, I really doubt the patron could be held too accountable for that.
Quote
And while it is absolutely fine to say that the Noble should report the artists work to a templar (after all, that's how they know the work was liscensed or not) I don't think the artsists should be under such direct control of the templars.
Well, that's where we'll disagree.
Quote from: Fredd on September 28, 2013, 02:11:32 PM
That being said. I still think Patrons should have final say on there employees Shadow Work. And in all honesty, this gives a very tangible benefit to being an Artist with an actual patron.
Maybe farther down the road, but right now, that's part of the problem. Until we have deemed that the problem is fixed, we're not going to give patrons unfettered control over what their partisan artists do.
Quote from: Law&Order on September 28, 2013, 02:18:55 PM
Quote from: Fredd on September 28, 2013, 02:02:55 PM
An artists rank has nothing to do with there actual skill levels. I've had Artists with midling skill levels do Master level work. It's realy about Rp, planning, creativity, and not getting caught. Granted, coded skills help you not get caught. But there is always more then one way of doing things, and usually, the one that's 100% hard coded, is the most unsafe.
Sure, in the previous system...but you gotta have the skills to get paid in this new one. Until there's sub-contracting and less code specific Artistry worked out in these contract docs, that's how it kind of looks.
You don't need much skill to kill people in the game.
If someone else poisons things for you, you just have to get that into something that will get into the target (that requires roleplay). After that, depending on the poison and the state of the victim...well, as they say, even a merchant can chop wood, right?
As for stealing, you don't need skill for that either. You just need access. Befriend them and go to their apartment, get added to the rent, then take what is needed. (Is that convoluted just to steal something? Yes, sure, but it's possible, at least.)
As for the mayhem type stuff, you don't need skill for that, either. Dropping something off and then arranging it requires roleplay (and attention to RP and the local environment).
Does skill help? Sure it does! It opens up lots of opportunities. Is skill everything? Hardly! Roleplay is still a large part of things.
Quote from: Fredd on September 28, 2013, 02:28:34 PM
Quote from: Law&Order on September 28, 2013, 02:18:55 PM
Quote from: Fredd on September 28, 2013, 02:02:55 PM
An artists rank has nothing to do with there actual skill levels. I've had Artists with midling skill levels do Master level work. It's realy about Rp, planning, creativity, and not getting caught. Granted, coded skills help you not get caught. But there is always more then one way of doing things, and usually, the one that's 100% hard coded, is the most unsafe.
Sure, in the previous system...but you gotta have the skills to get paid in this new one. Until there's sub-contracting and less code specific Artistry worked out in these contract docs, that's how it kind of looks.
From what I read, and Nyr please tell me if I'm wrong or not here, Gaining your ranks as an artist in the new system will be much like the last system. Your rank is essentially trust. You earn trust by taking and completing work successfully. And while hard coded skills will always help, they aren't the end all be all.
IE:
You get contracted to steal Corporal Amos of House Dasari's house guard's prized dagger.
A normal artist might pick it off his belt.
A master might follow them, learn that they are having a secret affair with someone, follow them to there place, take the dagger while they are having sex, and leave a much cheaper dagger in it's place. Leaving the person to suspect the person they are having an affair with of foul play.
Creativity is what makes a Master, not hard coded skills.
Definitely.
Quote from: Nyr on September 28, 2013, 02:32:03 PM
.
QuoteThey are the one's that feed, water, train, and take responsibility if the Artist's actions come to light.
They definitely do the first few things, but they also would potentially get proceeds from whatever their artist does in the future. Also if their artist is working on an independent job, I really doubt the patron could be held too accountable for that.
Can you honestly say that if there are two competing noble houses, if one of them's artist got caught doing a contract, the other would not use that information against there rival?
As for serving there city. Don't employees of noble houses serve there city by serving there Lords and Ladies? Why is it you are shifting from this idea/mentality? Perhapse it was mentioned on the last eleven pages and I missed it....But could you explain to me why you are making Shadow Artists essentially there own neutral group?
Quote from: Molten Heart on September 28, 2013, 02:28:44 PM
Quote from: Nyr on September 28, 2013, 02:10:03 PM
Quote from: Molten Heart on September 28, 2013, 01:17:01 PM
The greatest obstacle to the whole "Shadow Artist System" is the unavailability or lack of capable shadow artists. In a system where failure is the only way to learn and failure is illegal.... that seems to be a problem. If there were some system or organization that helped to cultivate and develop young shadow artist talent, I Think that alone would go a long way to helping develop the art of crime in Tuluk. The documentation is great and people can argue about the finer details of the organization until they are blue int he face, but if the role of the shadow artist is too difficult and/or unrewarding, people just won't play those roles.
Providing that training/cultivation in a non-cheesy way should be a goal in the city as a whole, and we'll see what we can do to make that more of a reality.
I hope staff would consider not just IC solutions but also game world design solutions.
Given the amount of coded solutions we've been wading in lately, we'd be remiss not to look in that area for this as well.
Quote from: Fredd on September 28, 2013, 02:31:25 PM
See, and that's what I feel is contrary to the feel of Tuluk. A Tuluki artist should always strive to Master whatever art they practice. This has always been the feel of Tuluk to me. Now it's like "I want you to get really good, but don' become the best. I don't want the best working for me."
It's only like that if you are an artist more devoted to a patron than to your art. If you're truly devoted to your art, ditch the patron or lie to them and hide your rank ascension.
Quote from: Taven on September 28, 2013, 02:31:47 PM
This is just a wild guess, but...
I'm pretty sure that very, very few PCs will ever reach the Master level of Shadow Artists. This is comparable to how very few PCs make full Bard, which Nyr compared a little to Shadow Artists (http://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,46260.msg779151.html#msg779151). I think it's going to take IC years and years to get to the level of Master Shadow artist, and I suspect you will have had to pull off a lot of challenging jobs.
I would like to see official BETA docs on it, though. Nyr? Can we see those or are they secret/still being decided on?
Official beta docs on what, ascension? Basically a certain amount of quality and quantity (you do good work and you do needed work and you will rise in rank). Does that need to be spelled out with examples on what's quality work and what is not? We can do that, sure. It won't be exactly comparable to bards though because bards have their little nitpicky sort of things like "dance with a shoe on your head in a competition on a Detal" (not exactly, but you get my point), and artists wouldn't have provisions like "lol gotta kill my first Chosen Lurd so i can be a master".
Quote from: Nyr on September 28, 2013, 01:47:06 PM
Quote from: Sayyadina on September 28, 2013, 01:40:56 AM
So the current "system" has failed and seemingly needs to be replaced with a new system that is stacked full of mandates to force more use of the new system compared to the current "system." However, I think this is based on a false assumption that the current "system" isn't working because of a lack of mandates. I think the current "system" doesn't work because no one knows about it! I'll bet that the majority of posters in the thread were unaware that templars can currently confidentially broker contracts between an agent and a "shadow artist." I didn't know until fairly recently. So is the failure of the current "system" one of design or of implementation? There are no detailed public documents about the current "system," even. Of course it won't work.
http://www.armageddon.org/help/view/Tuluki%20Roleplay
Quote
Law and Order in Tuluk:
Some time ago, a law won the Triumvirate majority for the reinstatement of an old Tuluki custom: licensed thievery and assassination.
Thievery and assassination:
Thieves and assassins (by trade, not coded guild) are required to register with a member of the Templarate prior to conducting theft or an assassination. The templar records this information in the License Registry: the individual's name, description, organization (if any), legal occupation (if any), thief or assassin, the recording templar's name and the record date. (For example: "Jonah, a tall human male with blue eyes and brown hair, knife-maker of House Salarr, registers as assassin, recorded by Faithful Lady Janis, 168th day of the Descending Sun, year 59 of the 20th Age.")
Thieves
A thief is charged a one-time registration fee of 300 obsidian. Registered thieves are still expected to operate with enough wisdom and skill not to get caught; after all, this law is a rebirth of the appreciation of high expertise in Old Tuluk. If a registered thief is caught, however, she may be let off with a warning, or receive a lessened penalty, at the templar's discretion (conscientious PC templars may wish to make this clear to the thief). Needless to say, registered thieves may also receive paying jobs from the templarate.
Assassins
An assassin registers for free, but must purchase a separate "license" for each assassination. A license is not a tangible object, but rather a pledge from the templarate not to act on the findings of an investigation - provided the crime has been committed as recorded, and executed with skill and discretion.
Definitive and in-depth, no, but if you read Tuluki docs, it's there at least.
The docs above are exhibit A in the failure of the current "system." What the current documentation says is you can steal stuff and kill people if you get a license first and you're discreet about it, and the templarate may pay you to kill people. That's it. To me, it's not surprising that an apocryphal system of anonymous brokerage that is beloved and heavily used hasn't sprung up from that foundation. Why not try out more detailed documentation before going the route of heavy-handed mandates? We may be able to make a win-win where both those that want more utilization are happy and those that don't want mandates are happy. Is that not the most desirable outcome?
Now, if the heavy-handed mandates are included because the staff thinks that's the way Tuluk should be, then that's a separate issue and that's fine because they run the game. They can make 1+1 = 3 in Zalanthas and players will adjust. But if Tuluk is supposed to be a place of heavy-handed mandates, then will there be a system for patron X to go to the templarate to anonymously compel guards or hunters from other clans to do patron X's work? Or will patron X be able to go to the templarate to anonymously compel bards to sing particular songs?
Quote from: Nyr on September 28, 2013, 01:47:06 PM
Quote
IMO "shadow artists" are currently underutilized not because they're refusing jobs or they're overly loyal, but because most players are oblivious and uncertain about what the current "system" is and what the expectations are for their roles, especially for contracting agents and "shadow artists." This uncertainty might manifest as reluctance or excess loyalty, but those are symptoms and not causes.
Isn't that sort of a chicken or egg argument? "It's not that people are reluctant to work or too loyal to their patrons, it's that they don't know that they are supposed to be invested in the 'system' and should be more loyal to the 'system.'"
I don't think it's a chicken or egg argument, which is a question of timing and causality. It's plausible that uncertainty and lack of documentation may cause artist PCs to be reluctant or too loyal to participate in a system they don't know exists, but how does it logically follow that being reluctant or overly loyal will cause PCs to become uncertain about a poorly documented system?
This disagreement can be definitively settled by implementing a well documented system without all the mandates and looking at system utilization after the change.
Quote from: Nyr on September 28, 2013, 01:47:06 PM
Defining the documentation and laying out guidelines should put us in a good position to later (if deemed necessary) loosen up restrictions. Again, it's easier to move from more strict to less strict than vice versa.
But if a well documented system without mandates is implemented and it subsequently works, you won't even need to make the harder move to a more strict system, AND everyone is happy. If you go ahead with the new documentation with all the mandates then you're guaranteeing that you have to make the hard move from less strict to more strict AND you make some people unhappy.
Quote from: Nyr on September 28, 2013, 01:47:06 PM
Quote
The new documentation is stacked full of mandates for the contracting agent, for the templars, and for the "shadow artists," and it looks to me that the mandates are the biggest source of concern for those responding in this thread. I know those many mandates are my biggest personal concern.
The overall gist of it probably is not going to change. Some parts of it might be tweaked based on feedback. Removing all of them is more than likely not going to happen.
What's the harm in trying the well documented system minus some of the mandates? The advantage is you may not even need to make the less-strict-to-more-strict change and you may be able to thread the needle of achieving the greater utilization everyone wants without the mandates that some people don't want.
Quote from: Fredd on September 28, 2013, 02:31:25 PM
See, and that's what I feel is contrary to the feel of Tuluk. A Tuluki artist should always strive to Master whatever art they practice. This has always been the feel of Tuluk to me. Now it's like "I want you to get really good, but don' become the best. I don't want the best working for me."
I see it as more "to be the best, you'll have to give something up". You CAN still work for a main Chosen House... You'd just be held more at arm's length then, because they wouldn't want to give you access to their buildings. It would be partisan/patron based rather then employment based for the Master level.
Quote from: Fredd on September 28, 2013, 02:39:33 PMCan you honestly say that if there are two competing noble houses, if one of them's artist got caught doing a contract, the other would not use that information against there rival?
If the shadow artist is a public partisan to someone, I think rival Chosen (or Faithful) would use it against each other, so I agree with you there. I mean, if the patron is training that person up, isn't it a little on them if that person fails?
Maybe this will lead to more secret behind-the-scenes arrangements. I mean, really, having a secret patronage of a Shadow Artist seems like a pretty good option. You train them and use them, and if they mess up, your rivals don't know that they're related to you anyway.
Quote from: Nyr on September 28, 2013, 02:43:16 PMOfficial beta docs on what, ascension? Basically a certain amount of quality and quantity (you do good work and you do needed work and you will rise in rank). Does that need to be spelled out with examples on what's quality work and what is not? We can do that, sure. It won't be exactly comparable to bards though because bards have their little nitpicky sort of things like "dance with a shoe on your head in a competition on a Detal" (not exactly, but you get my point), and artists wouldn't have provisions like "lol gotta kill my first Chosen Lurd so i can be a master".
Guidelines or documentation on rank advancement, yes please! Specifically, I'd be happy if you could answer the following two questions:
1. Do you have to seek advancement to Master, or is it something that will happen eventually anyway?2. What are the guidelines for refusing advancement to Master, if it is something that will happen to you eventually no matter what?These are both very important, not only for Shadow Artists, but for their employers and patrons. You probably don't want that Journeyman assassin becoming a Master even if they don't want to, that would suck.
I am also curious on how subjective the rank advancement is and also
who does the promoting? Is it a staff verdict, or is it based on PC Templar decisions? I get that you can't say "do x, y, and z" for rank advancement, but some loose or general guidelines could be helpful.
Quote from: Taven on September 28, 2013, 02:46:12 PM
Quote from: Fredd on September 28, 2013, 02:31:25 PM
See, and that's what I feel is contrary to the feel of Tuluk. A Tuluki artist should always strive to Master whatever art they practice. This has always been the feel of Tuluk to me. Now it's like "I want you to get really good, but don' become the best. I don't want the best working for me."
I see it as more "to be the best, you'll have to give something up". You CAN still work for a main Chosen House... You'd just be held more at arm's length then, because they wouldn't want to give you access to their buildings. It would be partisan/patron based rather then employment based for the Master level.
Quote from: Fredd on September 28, 2013, 02:39:33 PMCan you honestly say that if there are two competing noble houses, if one of them's artist got caught doing a contract, the other would not use that information against there rival?
If the shadow artist is a public partisan to someone, I think rival Chosen (or Faithful) would use it against each other, so I agree with you there. I mean, if the patron is training that person up, isn't it a little on them if that person fails?
Maybe this will lead to more secret behind-the-scenes arrangements. I mean, really, having a secret patronage of a Shadow Artist seems like a pretty good option. You train them and use them, and if they mess up, your rivals don't know that they're related to you anyway.
Maybe. I will definately be trying out this system when it takes place. And Nyr seems to be suggesting that there is a clear reason for this, that the staff know about. I wish I knew what that problem was so I might be able to offer suggestions. I feel strongly on this issue because probably over half my time played has been as a shadow artist in Tuluk. (I might be wrong, but it feels that way) And I do have a cool idea on something that can be done with the new system that I will definately talk to Staff about in the not-so-distant future.
Quote from: Fredd on September 28, 2013, 02:39:33 PM
Quote from: Nyr on September 28, 2013, 02:32:03 PM
.
QuoteThey are the one's that feed, water, train, and take responsibility if the Artist's actions come to light.
They definitely do the first few things, but they also would potentially get proceeds from whatever their artist does in the future. Also if their artist is working on an independent job, I really doubt the patron could be held too accountable for that.
Can you honestly say that if there are two competing noble houses, if one of them's artist got caught doing a contract, the other would not use that information against there rival?
Introducing the possibility that a contract could well mean you are supposed to get caught should eliminate that.
QuoteHowever, speaking of getting caught, what if a contract stipulates that you should get caught? It's possible that such a scenario could occur. Barring the absurd, a contract may stipulate any number of things. The artist's job is to fulfill the contract...period. If the contract calls for the artist attempting something and failing, that may require more finesse than one that requires simple execution. The artist does not care, the artist merely does the task they are paid to do. Similarly, the templarate is brokering the contract to the artist, and will not punish an artist for fulfilling a contract as given. If a contract does call for more unusual practices, the templar providing the contract will go over it carefully with the artist to be sure they understand how it works. There is art to be found in any number of practices.
Quote
As for serving there city. Don't employees of noble houses serve there city by serving there Lords and Ladies? Why is it you are shifting from this idea/mentality? Perhapse it was mentioned on the last eleven pages and I missed it....But could you explain to me why you are making Shadow Artists essentially there own neutral group?
Employees serve their nobles but do not serve the city. While highborn are better than commoners and everyone knows that, and being an employee of a highborn noble or that House has prestige not afforded to the unaffiliated, they can't be said to really be serving the city, despite the disagreement of noble patrons.
Bards serve their patrons but eventually serve the interests of their Circles; this is part of the roleplay involved in playing a bard and part of what is expected for that role.
Why are we making shadow artists their own neutral group? Because we're defining more work to be done, and that hinges on artists being available to do it even if they're tied to a patron. Additionally, it hinges on those with the right clout to be able to hire artists to do work, but that's something that can be fixed pretty easily. People like working for patrons, cool. That's fine. There just may be some additional work that is not against your patron that needs to be done.
What exactly are the differences between the old and the new systems? I'm only picking up two new things, with the rest of the system being the same. Those those wo differences being:
-All Templars (not just Lirathans, because there is only one order now) can issue contacts/licenses
-Artists must comply with a contract once they are selected by the templarate
Are there others I have missed?
Quote from: Nyr on September 28, 2013, 02:53:29 PM
Quote from: Fredd on September 28, 2013, 02:39:33 PM
Quote from: Nyr on September 28, 2013, 02:32:03 PM
.
QuoteThey are the one's that feed, water, train, and take responsibility if the Artist's actions come to light.
They definitely do the first few things, but they also would potentially get proceeds from whatever their artist does in the future. Also if their artist is working on an independent job, I really doubt the patron could be held too accountable for that.
Can you honestly say that if there are two competing noble houses, if one of them's artist got caught doing a contract, the other would not use that information against there rival?
Introducing the possibility that a contract could well mean you are supposed to get caught should eliminate that.
QuoteHowever, speaking of getting caught, what if a contract stipulates that you should get caught? It's possible that such a scenario could occur. Barring the absurd, a contract may stipulate any number of things. The artist's job is to fulfill the contract...period. If the contract calls for the artist attempting something and failing, that may require more finesse than one that requires simple execution. The artist does not care, the artist merely does the task they are paid to do. Similarly, the templarate is brokering the contract to the artist, and will not punish an artist for fulfilling a contract as given. If a contract does call for more unusual practices, the templar providing the contract will go over it carefully with the artist to be sure they understand how it works. There is art to be found in any number of practices.
Quote
As for serving there city. Don't employees of noble houses serve there city by serving there Lords and Ladies? Why is it you are shifting from this idea/mentality? Perhapse it was mentioned on the last eleven pages and I missed it....But could you explain to me why you are making Shadow Artists essentially there own neutral group?
Employees serve their nobles but do not serve the city. While highborn are better than commoners and everyone knows that, and being an employee of a highborn noble or that House has prestige not afforded to the unaffiliated, they can't be said to really be serving the city, despite the disagreement of noble patrons.
Bards serve their patrons but eventually serve the interests of their Circles; this is part of the roleplay involved in playing a bard and part of what is expected for that role.
Why are we making shadow artists their own neutral group? Because we're defining more work to be done, and that hinges on artists being available to do it even if they're tied to a patron. Additionally, it hinges on those with the right clout to be able to hire artists to do work, but that's something that can be fixed pretty easily. People like working for patrons, cool. That's fine. There just may be some additional work that is not against your patron that needs to be done.
Crap...How to ask this....
From what I can tell, you want the Shadow Artists to be similar to bards. They can be closely associated with a patron at first, but as there abilities improve, they would naturally move away from there patrons. Are staff looking to make a clan now for Shadow Artists?
Edit: Subtle change to wording to move away from talk of hard coded skills
Just me, and I'm pretty much always the negative one, but my prediction is that subjecting yourself to the whim of the 'super subtle elite' will start off as the popular thing to do. This will likely revitalize some things. And then it will die when that uber subtlety and plotty and the true allocation of power take over, and people realize that they're going to get boned over and over again since there's knowledge of them and their resourcefulness.
And then it will go back to secrecy being the God of Survival.
Quote from: Sayyadina on September 28, 2013, 02:44:18 PM
The docs above are exhibit A in the failure of the current "system." What the current documentation says is you can steal stuff and kill people if you get a license first and you're discreet about it, and the templarate may pay you to kill people. That's it. To me, it's not surprising that an apocryphal system of anonymous brokerage that is beloved and heavily used hasn't sprung up from that foundation. Why not try out more detailed documentation before going the route of heavy-handed mandates? We may be able to make a win-win where both those that want more utilization are happy and those that don't want mandates are happy. Is that not the most desirable outcome?
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.
Quote
Now, if the heavy-handed mandates are included because the staff thinks that's the way Tuluk should be, then that's a separate issue and that's fine because they run the game. They can make 1+1 = 3 in Zalanthas and players will adjust. But if Tuluk is supposed to be a place of heavy-handed mandates, then will there be a system for patron X to go to the templarate to anonymously compel guards or hunters from other clans to do patron X's work?
No. This is for shadow artists. That has nothing to do with them. The templarate doesn't manage partisan agreements except in this one case.
QuoteOr will patron X be able to go to the templarate to anonymously compel bards to sing particular songs?
No. This is for shadow artists. Bards have little or nothing to do with them, overtly. The templarate doesn't manage bardic partisan arrangements.
Quote
I don't think it's a chicken or egg argument, which is a question of timing and causality. It's plausible that uncertainty and lack of documentation may cause artist PCs to be reluctant or too loyal to participate in a system they don't know exists, but how does it logically follow that being reluctant or overly loyal will cause PCs to become uncertain about a poorly documented system?
This disagreement can be definitively settled by implementing a well documented system without all the mandates and looking at system utilization after the change.
Or we can settle it by implementing a well-documented system with mandates and looking at system utilization after the change. We're definitely on opposite sides of this issue.
Quote
But if a well documented system without mandates is implemented and it subsequently works, you won't even need to make the harder move to a more strict system, AND everyone is happy. If you go ahead with the new documentation with all the mandates then you're guaranteeing that you have to make the hard move from less strict to more strict AND you make some people unhappy.
We disagree.
Quote
What's the harm in trying the well documented system minus some of the mandates? The advantage is you may not even need to make the less-strict-to-more-strict change and you may be able to thread the needle of achieving the greater utilization everyone wants without the mandates that some people don't want.
Ultimately, some restrictions are going to be implemented and you are not going to like all of them, we will see how it works, and that's that.
Quote from: Fredd on September 28, 2013, 02:59:16 PM
Crap...How to ask this....
From what I can tell, you want the Shadow Artists to be similar to bards. They can be closely associated with a patron at first, but as there skills increase, they would naturally move away from there patrons. Are staff looking to make a clan now for Shadow Artists?
I imagine this is sort of a difficult question for staff to answer, if not just because they have all the answers and due to the IC sensitive nature of the game they can't really give straight answers to specific questions because if they say anything they're possibly giving something away and if they say "Find out IC" people just get mad and think they're being a jerk.
But I believe this the natural way things should work in Tuluk. In Tuluk there is a bardic sub-culture, why not have a shadow artist sub-culture too?
Quote from: Molten Heart on September 28, 2013, 03:05:12 PM
Quote from: Fredd on September 28, 2013, 02:59:16 PM
Crap...How to ask this....
From what I can tell, you want the Shadow Artists to be similar to bards. They can be closely associated with a patron at first, but as there skills increase, they would naturally move away from there patrons. Are staff looking to make a clan now for Shadow Artists?
I imagine this is sort of a difficult question for staff to answer, if not just because they have all the answers and due to the IC sensitive nature of the game they can't really give straight answers to specific questions because if they say anything they're possibly giving something away and if they say "Find out IC" people just get mad and think they're being a jerk.
But I believe this the natural way things should work in Tuluk. In Tuluk there is a bardic sub-culture, why not have a shadow artist sub-culture too?
I agree it's hard to answer. It was hard to ask. And the culture has always been there, but more of one could be interesting. I think perhapse I should just submit a question to staff asking what I want to ask. probably a bit better.
Have you considered stipulating that Shadow Artists may not be lifesworn to any Noble House? Every Noble House has recruitment periods, and lifesworn requirements. Perhaps Northern Houses, so apparently connected to their commoners, should do one of two things, if Shadow Artists are to be publically known or marked.
- Do away with lifesworn employees, and instead live and die with the patron/partisan system.
- Require a person to not be a Shadow Artist of any rank at all if they elect to be a lifesworn employee.
Conversely, the tattoo that marks you as a Shadow Artist could not exist at all until you retired, at which point, the rank you retired at would dictate your inking. The Templars' IC or OOC boards could simply keep a list of known Shadow Artists and their unofficial rankings. The entire concept of publicly marking your shadow artists seems to defeat the purpose, since I can just strip your punk ass down.
I would think that any of these solutions at all would not only muddle the waters in a positive manner, causing even more fear and suspicion, but also eliminate some of the Why would I hire X issues I'm reading about. I think that Shadows should probably live in the shadows.
I'll also note that although shadow artists might not be marked during their career under my suggestion, the marking they get when/if they retire should probably mean increased stature. A Shadow Artists who comes to a noble asking to be lifesworn and is marked has declared he is retired, and a MASTER. Nobles should probably be very interested in hiring that guy, on the spot.
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?
Quote from: Molten Heart on September 28, 2013, 02:56:03 PM
What exactly are the differences between the old and the new systems? I'm only picking up two new things, with the rest of the system being the same. Those those wo differences being:
-All Templars (not just Lirathans, because there is only one order now) can issue contacts/licenses
-Artists must comply with a contract once they are selected by the templarate
Are there others I have missed?
Yes...actually, a lot of the discussions and questions have been around those other things. I'll try to get to it later but it there are other things listed in the "restrictions" part of the primary doc.
Jherlen's suggestion gets two thumbs way up from me. It keeps the spirit of the proposed changes and solves the playability issues I've been concerned with.
In effect, it's a formalized northern Guild operating under the shadow of the templarate's oversight.
Quote from: Fredd on September 28, 2013, 02:59:16 PM
Crap...How to ask this....
From what I can tell, you want the Shadow Artists to be similar to bards. They can be closely associated with a patron at first, but as there abilities improve, they would naturally move away from there patrons. Are staff looking to make a clan now for Shadow Artists?
Similar only in one way: that they become independent of long-term patronage/lifesworn employment at the highest rank.
Quote from: Armaddict on September 28, 2013, 03:00:49 PM
Just me, and I'm pretty much always the negative one, but my prediction is that subjecting yourself to the whim of the 'super subtle elite' will start off as the popular thing to do. This will likely revitalize some things. And then it will die when that uber subtlety and plotty and the true allocation of power take over, and people realize that they're going to get boned over and over again since there's knowledge of them and their resourcefulness.
And then it will go back to secrecy being the God of Survival.
Isn't secrecy the god of this system? Shouldn't it be?
Quote from: Nyr on September 28, 2013, 02:22:00 PM
I guess you mean virtually. Given that this is tradition and law and enforced by the templarate, I would think that the majority work within that system. The minority probably couldn't or shouldn't be disclosed except as an estimate if/when that comes up.
Yes, I meant virtually. If the majority work in the system the PCs should reflect that. We need severe punishment if you don't follow the system, and it shouldn't be done quietly either. Criminals being publicly punished and shamed reassures the populace that the traditions are alive and must be adhered to.
Quote from: The7DeadlyVenomz on September 28, 2013, 03:09:18 PM
Have you considered stipulating that Shadow Artists may not be lifesworn to any Noble House? Every Noble House has recruitment periods, and lifesworn requirements. Perhaps Northern Houses, so apparently connected to their commoners, should do one of two things, if Shadow Artists are to be publically known or marked.
- Do away with lifesworn employees, and instead live and die with the patron/partisan system.
- Require a person to not be a Shadow Artist of any rank at all if they elect to be a lifesworn employee.
"May not be" in this case is different from bards (bards seriously "may not be" lifesworn if they expect to be Bard rank or higher). I guess we can say that is the case but without saying that it leaves the door open for potential betrayal.
Quote
Conversely, the tattoo that marks you as a Shadow Artist could not exist at all until you retired, at which point, the rank you retired at would dictate your inking. The Templars' IC or OOC boards could simply keep a list of known Shadow Artists and their unofficial rankings. The entire concept of publicly marking your shadow artists seems to defeat the purpose, since I can just strip your punk ass down.
But you'd be happy to keep a lower/mid-ranked artist because you can use them for your own desired contracts and also be secure in the knowledge that they aren't a Master, so they can't be used against you.
Quote
I would think that any of these solutions at all would not only muddle the waters in a positive manner, causing even more fear and suspicion, but also eliminate some of the Why would I hire X issues I'm reading about. I think that Shadows should probably live in the shadows.
Possibly, it's an idea I'll add to the list to review.
Quote from: Nyr on September 28, 2013, 03:22:05 PM
Quote from: Fredd on September 28, 2013, 02:59:16 PM
Crap...How to ask this....
From what I can tell, you want the Shadow Artists to be similar to bards. They can be closely associated with a patron at first, but as there abilities improve, they would naturally move away from there patrons. Are staff looking to make a clan now for Shadow Artists?
Similar only in one way: that they become independent of long-term patronage/lifesworn employment at the highest rank.
Well i think that answers about everything I got for now.
I submitted a question a moment ago as well.
I'm interested in seeing how this will play out. I hope it brings out more roleplay.
Quote from: Delirium on September 28, 2013, 03:21:30 PM
In effect, it's a formalized northern Guild operating under the shadow of the templarate's oversight.
Precisely!
Quote from: Jherlen on September 28, 2013, 03:15:40 PMinteresting 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).
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?
Super secret registration with super secret unbribeable middle men, you mean? Totally inherent in this proposal. Yes, that's sarcasm.
Regardless, it's a super nice writeup, and from my own opinion, these systems are pretty much the coolest systems in literature. But they don't fit in roleplaying games right. They just don't work well, particularly where omission of information is commonplace. By that, an oblique reference...if every person used think, feel, and mood the way they are filled out and realized in literature, mindbenders would be far more capable in far more areas. Because this is a roleplaying game instead, and thus with far more personal interest invested in the storyline rather than progression of a predetermined plot, it doesn't work out the same in practice, generally speaking...all the necessary information doesn't get conveyed, which makes personal protection more a basis of being able to respond in different ways than 'catching things in motion'.
This will be subject to the same thing. It becomes far more beneficial to the player on all sides to do things the good old fashioned way, which makes you succeed or fail based on your own judgment rather than another's attempts at being plotty.
Likely convoluted, I'm taking a test as the same time, but I'm just always a skeptic. But the literature vs RP angle is pretty much where I've always felt like Tuluk suffered, and this will likely continue down the same line.
More directly...flock to the izdari board as a valuable piece, for the coolness factor, until you realize that you've literally restrained yourself to the game board, and are sacrificed freely or sniped at any time because you've made your role on the board open and easy to access. Bad blood will rise, and the freedom to stay off the board aside from your own chosen participation points will reign again. Just my prediction.
Quote from: Nyr on September 28, 2013, 03:33:41 PM
Quote from: Jherlen on September 28, 2013, 03:15:40 PMinteresting 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).
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?
Assign Templar to oversee it to begin with. Then recruit the 'face' from within. This face would be someone who got up to master through playing. I always prefer to see "promote from within" then sponsored roles in these types of situations.
I only have one problem with this type of institution. It will be pretty obvious who attends it and who doesn't. Shadow Agents will become known for simply going there to 'train.'
EDIT:
I actually dislike this TBH. Nobles don't have any reasons to nurture their own team if they can just outsource everything.
Quote from: Nyr on September 28, 2013, 03:33:41 PM
Quote from: Jherlen on September 28, 2013, 03:15:40 PMinteresting 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).
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 don't think that a templar should be in charge of said group. But the very fact that all work comes from the templar's makes them closely associated.
Quote from: Nyr on September 28, 2013, 03:01:19 PM
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!
Quote from: Nyr on September 28, 2013, 03:01:19 PM
Quote
I don't think it's a chicken or egg argument, which is a question of timing and causality. It's plausible that uncertainty and lack of documentation may cause artist PCs to be reluctant or too loyal to participate in a system they don't know exists, but how does it logically follow that being reluctant or overly loyal will cause PCs to become uncertain about a poorly documented system?
This disagreement can be definitively settled by implementing a well documented system without all the mandates and looking at system utilization after the change.
Or we can settle it by implementing a well-documented system with mandates and looking at system utilization after the change. We're definitely on opposite sides of this issue.
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.
Quote from: Nyr on September 28, 2013, 03:01:19 PM
Quote
What's the harm in trying the well documented system minus some of the mandates? The advantage is you may not even need to make the less-strict-to-more-strict change and you may be able to thread the needle of achieving the greater utilization everyone wants without the mandates that some people don't want.
Ultimately, some restrictions are going to be implemented and you are not going to like all of them, we will see how it works, and that's that.
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."
Quote from: Sayyadina on September 28, 2013, 02:44:18 PM
Now, if the heavy-handed mandates are included because the staff thinks that's the way Tuluk should be, then that's a separate issue and that's fine because they run the game. They can make 1+1 = 3 in Zalanthas and players will adjust.
...Including this player!
Thanks Nyr for being so diligent in responding to my posts (and to so many others) in this format!
Hell, Nyr even answered my submitted question already. I'm not sure what he put in his coffee, but I want some!
Quote from: Nyr on September 28, 2013, 03:33:41 PM
Quote from: Jherlen on September 28, 2013, 03:15:40 PMinteresting 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).
You'd need one or two PCs to be around for brokering contracts; the equivalent of another merchant house clan or so in Tuluk. They'd probably need to be sponsored at first, but later on might not necessarily have to be. The Shadow Brokers (I mainly just wanted to use that term cos of Mass Effect) don't need to be shadow artists at all, they just need to be stone-faced, tight-lipped negotiating badasses. Besides the need for absolute secrecy, there really aren't that many other requirements on the role in terms of player responsibilities.
And let's be honest, if the system as outlined takes off, it's going to be an extra burden on the players of templars anyway to administer. Templars have never seemed like a role that has problems with too little to do. They can keep themselves plenty busy with politicking, running the militia, chasing down criminals, fighting amongst each other, and so on. Administering the shadow artist contracts sounds like a half-time job at least, it's way more involved that just handing out dull black gems or merchants' licenses. Why not acknowledge that and let other players handle the load?
Quote
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.
Quote from: Jherlen on September 28, 2013, 03:49:29 PM
Quote from: Nyr on September 28, 2013, 03:33:41 PM
Quote from: Jherlen on September 28, 2013, 03:15:40 PMinteresting 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).
You'd need one or two PCs to be around for brokering contracts; the equivalent of another merchant house clan or so in Tuluk. They'd probably need to be sponsored at first, but later on might not necessarily have to be. The Shadow Brokers (I mainly just wanted to use that term cos of Mass Effect) don't need to be shadow artists at all, they just need to be stone-faced, tight-lipped negotiating badasses. Besides the need for absolute secrecy, there really aren't that many other requirements on the role in terms of player responsibilities.
And let's be honest, if the system as outlined takes off, it's going to be an extra burden on the players of templars anyway to administer. Templars have never seemed like a role that has problems with too little to do. They can keep themselves plenty busy with politicking, running the militia, chasing down criminals, fighting amongst each other, and so on. Administering the shadow artist contracts sounds like a half-time job at least, it's way more involved that just handing out dull black gems or merchants' licenses. Why not acknowledge that and let other players handle the load?
Quote
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.
This. I was trying to say this..
Quote from: janeshephard on September 28, 2013, 03:37:50 PM
I only have one problem with this type of institution. It will be pretty obvious who attends it and who doesn't. Shadow Agents will become known for simply going there to 'train.'
EDIT:
I actually dislike this TBH. Nobles don't have any reasons to nurture their own team if they can just outsource everything.
That's true, SA's seen coming and going would give themselves up. Unless the training area was placed in a commonly-traveled part of the city, like Poet's Circle or something. But yeah, that's a downside. However, a city that's openly tattooing people as shadow artists probably isn't placing complete secrecy of who is and isn't one as highest priority.
Re: nobles nurturing their own team, I think you want to encourage insourcing and outsourcing both. The patron relationships that Nyr outlined seem to be the insourcing option, and there's no reason those would need to change or go away under this.
Quote from: Sayyadina on September 28, 2013, 03:44:18 PM
Quote from: Nyr on September 28, 2013, 03:01:19 PM
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:
QuoteTHE 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:
QuoteI 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.
QuoteThe 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
QuoteThe 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.
QuotePC 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.
Quote
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.
Quote
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.
Quote from: Jherlen on September 28, 2013, 03:49:29 PM
Quote
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 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.
Personally, depending on what exactly the changes to the new templars are. I can see this change opening up a fair amount of RP.
Quote from: Dresan on September 28, 2013, 04:15:21 PM
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.
Quote from: Jherlen on September 28, 2013, 03:15:40 PM
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.
Quote
* 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.
Quote from: Nyr on September 28, 2013, 04:06:50 PM
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:
Quote from: Sayyadina on September 28, 2013, 01:29:45 PM
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!
Quote from: Nyr on September 28, 2013, 04:23:07 PM
Quote from: Dresan on September 28, 2013, 04:15:21 PM
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
Quote from: Nyr on September 28, 2013, 04:23:07 PM
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? ;D
Maybe not. :-[
Quote from: Nyr on September 28, 2013, 04:09:29 PM
Quote from: Jherlen on September 28, 2013, 03:49:29 PM
Quote
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.
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.
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.
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).
Quote from: Nyr on September 28, 2013, 03:33:41 PM
Quote from: Jherlen on September 28, 2013, 03:15:40 PMinteresting 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.
Quote from: Nyr on September 28, 2013, 03:33:41 PMWould 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.
Quote from: Nyr on September 28, 2013, 12:37:03 PMFor 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.
Quote from: Ouroboros on September 28, 2013, 06:30:10 PM
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.
Quote from: janeshephard on September 28, 2013, 06:33:39 PM
Quote from: Ouroboros on September 28, 2013, 06:30:10 PM
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.
Quote from: Ouroboros on September 28, 2013, 06:41:50 PM
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.
Quote from: janeshephard on September 28, 2013, 06:47:14 PMI 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.
Quote from: Ouroboros on September 28, 2013, 06:56:55 PM
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.
Quote from: Outrider on September 28, 2013, 06:09:24 PM
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.
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.
Such a role, to me, is a new Merchant Style role. It'll be filled, and I suspect quite easily.
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.
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.
That it would be dealt with would be little comfort to the player of the burg smooshed by said templar. It is a risk that can be controlled for by licensed thiefses already by, well, choosing who they offer their services to. By hiding behind the right noble's skirts so that you're at least a little protected from taking a direct order from a templar to screw over your employer.
I don't know. Keep writing, though. I'm enjoying reading the ideas.
Quote from: Sayyadina on September 28, 2013, 05:22:54 PM
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:
I've posted a bit on this already. I'm pretty certain that the mandate can be kept without being painful.
To recap my reasoning: there will need to be solutions in place to ensure
- contracts that cannot be completed for OOC reasons can be backed out of gracefully
- contracts do not end up hanging round for undefinedly large periods of time
If you receive a contract to kill your character's favourite bard, you could delay the kill indefinitely unless there is some kind of time limit acting on you. Policing that time limit strictly with Serious Consequences is going to screw over the class of people who find out after some time that they can't complete contracts for OOC reasons.
The solution has to be that a time limit exists to make your hit in, and exceeding that time limit results in some reprimand that isn't ruinous.
Once such a solution exists, though, we effectively have a right of refusal, but refusal costs you a failure - a blot on your record, potentially a fine. And in some ways I think this is a good thing. Refusing a contract isn't something you do lightly in these circumstances. It costs you.
There is also the scenario which happens all-to-often to be considered:
Amos pisses off Malik. Malik takes a hit out on Amos with Shadow Artist JimBob. Amos goes out hunting and dies to gizhat #2342 and nobody finds the body, OR, Amos gets sidetracked by Real Life and doesn't log in for 3 months. Shadow Artist JimBob can't track down that damned Amos....
What now?
Quote from: Outrider on September 28, 2013, 07:32:48 PM
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.
Nyr has already said they will make sure contracts are priced reasonably. That's the staff's job, and it's a little unfair to assume that things will be priced so ridiculously low that nobody can actually profit from the system. Obviously staff will have to monitor the system and tweak prices to maintain the careful balance of services not being too expensive and giving enough profit. Odds are a couple of days spent digging clay will not be enough to pay for a hit on your rival clay-scooper.
And no, the sartist doesn't have much risk to himself at all. That's the whole point of the system: if the sartist is caught, he has a get-out-of-jail-free tattoo. He still gets paid half even if he fails the job. Dangerous jobs where the sartist's life is at risk will obviously pay much higher. Killing a sartist you caught in your estate rather than returning him unharmed to the templarate will probably lead to the templarate's displeasure.
QuoteThe 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.
I don't agree, but if you think so, then the loss of freedom for Tuluki sartists should be negligible, shouldn't it? If you're good enough to get away with over-stealing and overly violent, non-subtle acts of crime or doing other stuff the current system frowns upon, you're good enough to break the rules of the new system and get away with it. If you aren't doing that, then you aren't losing anything.
You got me there, hyz. I shall endeavor to be more fair and assume that the pawn in play doesn't have much risk to himself at all, that the templars will fairly lavish coin and favor down upon this newly minted and beloved Master Thief who will be honored for his (or her) ability to break into your apartment (but in a totally not 'over' stealing or unsubtle way).
I guess it's the loss of freedom that I'd chaff at. Not freedom as a PC but freedom as a player. The system, the documentation dictates my actions. And, I know, there's nothing that said I would have to be licensed.
I actually like most of the impending changes . . . and I love the attention being given to sneaky types in this thread almost as much as I like saying the word Shartist out loud.
Quote from: Taven on September 28, 2013, 02:51:43 PM
Quote from: Nyr on September 28, 2013, 02:43:16 PMOfficial beta docs on what, ascension? Basically a certain amount of quality and quantity (you do good work and you do needed work and you will rise in rank). Does that need to be spelled out with examples on what's quality work and what is not? We can do that, sure. It won't be exactly comparable to bards though because bards have their little nitpicky sort of things like "dance with a shoe on your head in a competition on a Detal" (not exactly, but you get my point), and artists wouldn't have provisions like "lol gotta kill my first Chosen Lurd so i can be a master".
Guidelines or documentation on rank advancement, yes please! Specifically, I'd be happy if you could answer the following two questions:
1. Do you have to seek advancement to Master, or is it something that will happen eventually anyway?
2. What are the guidelines for refusing advancement to Master, if it is something that will happen to you eventually no matter what?
These are both very important, not only for Shadow Artists, but for their employers and patrons. You probably don't want that Journeyman assassin becoming a Master even if they don't want to, that would suck.
I am also curious on how subjective the rank advancement is and also who does the promoting? Is it a staff verdict, or is it based on PC Templar decisions? I get that you can't say "do x, y, and z" for rank advancement, but some loose or general guidelines could be helpful.
I'm just bringing this up again since it got overlooked and hasn't been answered yet. If it's still being decided, then that is okay, I would just like to know as much.
Thoughts on everything else when I've had a chance to catch up properly.
I dont think making an artist who refused to be master incapable of ever getting it again is a good idea.
Odds are, becoming a master will have this type of path; A person becomes a partisan to a Noble. The noble helps the partisan go up in skill, prestige, and experience. The Noble dies, the partisan having nobody to be loyal to, except the city now, chooses to persue Master.
I've read through most of this thread (and all of the Beta docs), and if I keep reading I'll never get around to responding, so forgive me if I overlap a little with the last 4 pages. So far I haven't seen anyone approach this from the systemic interaction / game design angle, so hopefully this will not be tiring to read in spite of the length.
Idea: Thieves and Assassins will now be part of the same group.
Desired Effect: Not 100% sure, but I would guess it is to combine all legalized crime into a single set of rules for clarity and improved awareness of them.
Problems:- This is confusing for the people playing these roles. People who steal things are not necessarily people who kill as a profession and vice versa.
- Trying to put both of these under the same rules isn't streamlining, it makes it harder to find the information that applies to you.
Suggested Alternative: Create separate docs for Thieves and Assassins, but retain the parts that overlap, like the FAQ.
Idea: Thieves and Assassins will now be called "Shadow Artists"
Desired Effect: Establishing a common, documented name for these things IG.
Problems:- This is confusing for people trying to hire an artist. Thieves and Assassins aren't anywhere near similar enough to have the same name.
- The name doesn't make sense, given that part of the new things the docs include in "Shadow Artistry" are public violence, public embarrassment, and getting caught (and dragged through public)
- Tuluk is supposed to be subtle, per the role playing doc (http://armageddon.org/help/view/Tuluki%20Roleplay). Calling someone a "Shadow Artist" is less subtle than calling taxes "revenue enhancement".
Suggested Alternative: Have separate, different names for them. Personally, I'd call assassins "Caretakers" and thieves "Tutors" based on their jobs, but the best idea would be to poll the playerbase for new (separate) names.
Idea: Shadow Artists must do anything they're contracted to do, including being captured.
Desired Effect: Increased usage of legalized criminals, more RP and interaction, et cetera et cetera.
Problems:- Some of the things allowed in this system are in keeping with Allanaki culture, not Tuluki culture, and it will damage player perception of Tuluki RP the more it is used. Admittedly, Tuluki RP still doesn't match the way the docs say it should be, but this will make things worse.
- Tuluk is supposed to be a "civilized" place where even the criminals specialize to perform their acts skillfully, tastefully, in accord with the law, and out of the public eye. Now they're filling a role bards were meant to fill in regards to being a way for nobles to publicly embarrass each other. The only bard / prospective bard I've ever seen agitate a noble in public was a former character of mine.
- This will just encourage people to be criminals off-the-grid, resulting in less participation in the supply side of this system.
Suggested Alternative:- Allow Shadow Artists to refuse any contract that requires them to commit self-harm or actions that would endanger themselves beyond what is necessary for the criminal act. This doesn't mean the artist can say "Oh, well killing someone with bodyguards is dangerous" because bodyguards aren't a problem introduced by contract stipulations. It does, however, mean an artist can refuse to kill a noble in a public place while in plain sight and dressed like a 'Nakki templar.
- Limit contracts to things that are done stealthily, in keeping with Tuluk's culture of the dirt staying under the rug.
- Encourage bards to be bardier.
Idea: Shadow Artists cannot refuse any contract without penalty
Desired Effect: Increased usage of legalized criminals and keeping people out of the system who won't participate
Problems:- Anyone choosing to play a character under this system would be playing a mindless automaton or sociopath. It replaces the problem of people being unwilling to take jobs because of reluctance with people unwilling to join the system because they can't imagine a realistic person who would do these things and still be interesting to play.
- since people will still want to play criminals, this will just encourage people to do so off-the-grid, resulting in less participation in the supply side of this system and more talent on the illegal side.
- The remaining people who continue to play artists will be overwhelmed with work until people stop using the legal system of criminal hiring.
Suggested Alternative: Add refusal-related perks to going up in rank.
- Allow each level of Shadow Artist rank to come with a certain number of people the templarate are forbidden to give the artist a contract against. These people must be listed in advance of the contract against them being given to the artist, of course. This has the inverse benefit of keeping the Faithful aware of who the artist cares most about.
- At Master level, an artist's children and current lover cannot be targeted for contracts, even after retiring.
- None of these exemptions would be real limitations to keep these people from being disappeared or killed, they just wouldn't be the victims within the system.
Idea: All Shadow Artists work is contracted
Desired Effect: Encourages licensed criminals to seek patrons and combat the tendency of Thieves' licenses making people run amok.
Problems:- Thieves will now be like skill-spamming warriors, except using the steal command instead of sparring. This is insanely boring, even without comparing it to the thrill of practicing in public with low sneak and hide, and it requires the thief to bore at least one other person while training. It's also far worse for the RP element of training the steal skill because the need to find your character's justifications for targets is obviated.
- Anyone performing uncontracted theft will rocket past legal thieves, unless said thieves skill-spam, which comes back to reducing them to sparring. This shifts the talent to the side of breaking or entirely avoiding the system.
- Every. Single. Sneaky. Thing. A. Patron. Does. With. His. Or. Her. Partisans. Must. Go. Through. A. Contract. Process. Requiring. Said. Patron. To. Find. A. Templar. Set. Up. A. Meeting. Explain. What. Is. To. Be. Done. Pay. The. Templar. To. Use. His. Or. Her. Own. Partisans. Possibly. Wait. For. The. Templar. To. Contact. The. Partisan. (that part is unclear in the docs) And. Then. Wait. For. It. To. Be. Done. Before. Starting. A. New. Sneaky. Thing. That. Will. Require. The. Patron. To. Find. A. Templar. Set. Up. A. Meeting. Explain. What. Is. To. Be. Done. Pay. The. Templar. To. Use. His. Or. Her. Own. Partisans...
- The documentation does not cover contracts that require or explicitly call for teams to perform them.
Suggested Alternative: Only assassinations, vandalism of public art or property, and (if the staff keeps them) things that would happen in the public eye should be contracted, as they would otherwise require investigation.
Idea: Shadow Artists work is run exclusively by the templarate, though a double-blind system.
Desired Effect: Increased usage of legalized criminals, since now anyone can use one if they have the money and clout
Problems:- Staff approving contracts is no longer a matter of simply confirming the target would be valid under the law. Now it's a matter of
- Confirm the target is valid.
- Get enough information on the target to determine if the artist the templar chose was appropriate.
- Either communicate target details to the templar so they can pick a more appropriate artist or keep tabs on the templar's player's knowledge to confirm they're not simply playing dumb about lining up specific people to get killed.
- Keep tabs on who the templar is choosing to prevent system abuse through monopolizing someone's partisans to undermine them.
- From the staff side, there's a really crappy choice:
- Massive workload increase for the staff if they bother monitoring the system.
- Rapid distrust for the system from people playing under it or whose partisans are manipulated by it unless the staff undertakes a massive workload increase to monitor it.
- No one in their right mind would take on Shadow Artist partisans. The sole benefit of "you get to pick who does the job" is a very poor compensation for all of the costs incurred:
- You pay to train and equip the Shadow Artists, who anyone else can hire.
- Your rivals, albeit at random, can further their plans using your partisans.
- Your partisans can be damaged or killed, as well as potentially be disgraced, while performing contracts you don't know about for another's benefit.
- Your own partisans may be unavailable to work for you due to working on other contracts.
- You can be undermined by the templarate, either by them monopolizing your partisans or setting them up to fail or be killed. Even if the system itself works perfectly and the templar PCs actually behave as the docs tell them to, there are still plenty of opportunities for abusing someone alongside the system.
- Your partisans not only eventually can become the tools of your undoing unless you either undermine their progress or spy on them endlessly to make sure they don't take Master rank, but they also have intimate knowledge of your strengths and weaknesses
- Patrons will be far more likely to employ unlicensed criminals and feign ignorance (more in keeping with Allanki culture) than to go through all of the risk and frustration of this system, resulting in less supply of patronized Shadow Artists.
Suggested Alternative: Divide Shadow Artists, like bards, into those with Patrons and those who are unaffiliated. The system would work as follows. Shadow Artists with a patron can only be hired through the patron, though anything requiring a contract would still need the patron to pay for one from a templar. A life-sworn Shadow Artist would remain with their Patron, even at Master rank. Unaffiliated Shadow Artists are contracted through the templarate as described. To become a Master rank, an unaffiliated Shadow Artist would become life-sworn to the Templarate/City itself, and be held in higher esteem and social stature than a clan-associated Master Shadow Artist.
This would drastically reduce the potential staff workload; as there would no longer be a benefit for templars to abuse or commit actions undermine the system, there would be less monitoring needed to maintain faith in the system. It would also encourage patrons to stick with licensed criminal partisans, since they would not become a massive liability versus risking incurring social stigma of employing unlicensed criminals (if they get caught and it's public and denial of knowledge is impossible).
Idea: Anyone can take out a contract on anyone at their social level or lower; higher levels require a go-between
Desired Effect: Make social standing mean something, get commoner PCs to interact with nobles more, and possibly discourage lone-wolfing.
Problems:- Longer-lived commoner PCs will wind up having artificially enhanced influence over Tuluki culture. We're not talking about a conspiracy. It doesn't even need to be coordinated. The presence of just a few obnoxious people with the same bad ideas could result in new PCs being played based on what behavior will draw less fire from them, rather than what the staff want for Tuluk. Whatever subculture they create enforced by assassination could become the reality for Tuluki PCs. It doesn't matter that Tuluk has a virtual population of hundreds of thousands who don't behave that way because PCs don't have to interact with them.
- It's not in keeping with Tuluki culture, though I'll have to explain.
- For Commoners, this change will discourage using the system:
- I remember reading that assassins were often employed by people looking to move up the ladder. I recall reading it was not uncommon for a bard to bump off a better bard to make an opening they could be promoted into, unfortunately, the doc I'd have referenced seems to have been edited.
- Killing your way up the social ladder now requires you to involve a third party who may become hostile to you and inform your victim or, worse, agree to put out the hit and use your own money to have you killed instead.
- For the Chosen, it effectively makes their lives less sacred than the lowliest Legion recruit, who can not be targeted by this system for assassination.
- For the virtual masses, this will damage one of the biggest cultural divergences between Tuluk and Allanak.
- Allanak is a place where everyone are animals and nobles slaughter each other like gortok to rule the pack.
- Tuluk is "different" because the Chosen are "one big happy family" and, unlike Allanak, would never murder each other for personal gain, in the same way that they don't oppress Commoners or demand elaborate acts of deference such as bowing. (The docs regarding this appear to have been edited recently, and no longer contain any mention of Tuluki nobility's and templarate's efforts to distance themselves from Allanak symbolically.)
- Regardless of what is going on behind-the-scenes (noble on noble violence), it's well "known" that nobles can't have nobles killed in Tuluk. This shift things to where the population of Tuluk would be publicly aware nobles can have other nobles killed.
- This will discourage PC nobles from using their Shadow Artist partisans creatively, since the vast majority of the things the new system allows were already possible (and often times allowed) in the old system, whereas just having your rival murdered on a whim is not merely being allowed but streamlined by the new system.
- This will also discourage PC nobles from having to be particularly clever, given that they can not only have their rivals killed but (given the ability to hire anyone) not even have to train up their own killers to do it or come up with a means of doing it secretly.
Suggested Alternative:- Allow people to take out contracts on anyone at the level and lower in general, but also allow them to target the next level above them within their own social circle without needing a patron. This will not only encourage more use of the system, it will put leader PCs in the tricky position of determining who to promote (or recommend for promotion, depending on how that is handled), rather than being relatively safe in their jobs as long as they don't screw up too badly.
- Disallow nobles from taking out contracts on each other, or at least make it require some level of justification/work to get a contract than it takes for a baker to have a miller killed over some bad flour.
- If you keep nobles as valid targets, either add Legion ranks to the social structure so they can be killed as-normal or add an exception so the high-born can have them killed.
Idea: A contract can be for anything barring the absurd.
Desired Effect: More use of the system, increased demand, increased activity, and increased interaction.
Problems:- Forces people who use the system to be forced to take jobs they are qualified for but which have absolutely nothing to do with their license. If I'm playing a thief, I probably don't want a contract to proposition a noble in public to hurt their standing. If I'm playing an assassin, I probably don't want a contract to play private detective and shadow some bard to keep track of his/her adultery.
- Discourages people from participating in the supply side of the system, which will inevitably kill the demand side of the system since when things start taking forever to happen or never get done.
Suggested Alternative: Assassins only take assassin contracts, thieves only take theft/burglary contracts (depending on skill set), and the remaining contracts can be offered to anyone who registers with the templarate for that kind of work. Perhaps adding a third license for spying/sabotage would work, but it might be better to go another route. I'd recommend trying to encourage bards to act more like they were previously described in the docs (prior to the editing that occurred when Arm moved to a new version of the site), as the foils used by nobles to socially fence with one another. This could be done by offering them contracts that don't fit with theft, burglary, or murder and by including immunity from punishment for any artfully-performed bad behavior required in those contracts.
(Minor edit to fix a broken list tag.)
Let me start off by saying I love the fact there's documentation. Too often, players are left to flounder on their own until the staff smacks them with the ban hammer. So the only players who can prosper are those with a great deal of support from the playerbase, which encourages cliquish behavior that leaves the staff unwilling to enforce their minimally stated protocol. For everyone else, it's worse than just a glass ceiling. It's a glass ceiling with spikes.
However, as is usual when dealing with people being insular and pathetic, titans of virtue are demanded in order to teach people the proper and professional way of doing things. Thus we get mandates. I honestly looked over them on the first reading. I simply didn't think the staff could reasonably expect players to adhere to them. I took it with a wink and a nudge.
One should note that this documentation leaves anyone who plays a living, breathing character under onus of punishment from staff or PC leadership, via its excessively demanding mandates. So only two sorts of people can survive : the hard-bitten dedicates of Tuluki Shadow Artistry and those with the social protections to escape punishment.
Yes, this is very harsh. Very brutal. Murder, Corruption, and Betrayal and all that, right?
But the turnover is horrendous, and since maxed skills are required to meet most of the non-combative strictures for discretion, starting a new Shadow is a daunting task at the least. There are no trainers, nearly all safe training methods are banned as poor RP, and choosing the sneak class generally leaves you with little legal recourse for a steady flow of money. If you aren't getting a great deal of help, you must first establish your character as something other than a Shadow before you can actually be a Shadow.
Fair enough, but I think you're starting to see why there are so few participants in the current system.
It's also worth noting that the system of independently contracted Shadows itself discourages a culture of Shadow Artistry. On the one hand, a good Shadow can handle all jobs. This leaves all the little fellas in the dark, and they store because they get bored. Again, pointing to the fact that you can't base a character in being a sneak, which is contradicted by the guild system. On the other hand, the documentation specifically states that this system is meant to reduce conflict. By restricting sneakiness to independent contractors, anyone looking to contract sneaky jobs is drawing from the same pool of talent. So no client has an edge over their target, a sneak war is going to be a stalemate, and there just isn't ever going to be a clear victory. So by bringing sneakiness under control, this system reduces the client base to the impulsive and stupid.
In summary, I'm glad for new documentation. I'm glad you've shined this wordy light into the dark, but uh... you really should remove the grues.
Quote from: Jherlen on September 28, 2013, 03:15:40 PM
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?
Who would the Public Face be? Would it be an interesting role to play a Shadow Broker? This isn't stuff the Templarate would outsource to commoners. It's an individual with protection from a high-ranking templar, they can't talk about contract stuff to anyone but the Shadow Agent, the Shadow Artist picked for the contract, and the high-ranking templar who'd most likely be an NPC. They also cannot play politics in regards to contracts.
Furthermore, the Public Face/Shadow Brokers would need to be literate. This isn't some alley mafia, this is a formal Templarate sanctioned institution. Records will be kept. That makes me think the position requires either a House Negean noble or a literate slave scribe. Both would be very restricted roles because you'd know a lot, but you wouldn't be able to put any of it to use. If you leave the brokering role in the hands of Templars, they can't play politics with the specific contracts but they can still use the information in various ways.
My take is that it'd be fun to play a Shadow Artist, having your own clan, compound and all, but it would suck to be a Shadow Broker/Public Face. Someone compared it to House Nenyuk PCs and I don't think that's too far off.
If the Shadow Guild were an off-shoot of the Bards, and the Mediators were Nenyuk agents, I think all of this could work. But with the templars as the mediators, and Shadow Artists being independent, I don't think it would work. I think people would have too tough of a time to get things started, customers would be hesitant to trust a templar regarding the murder or robbery or "character assassination" of a "true-inked" Tuluki.
I've also noticed a complete lack of consideration for "people of interest" living and working legally in Tuluk, who are not citizens, as targets. Joe Indie is an independent merchant/trader in Tuluk. He's a true-inked citizen, and his employees are all true-inked citizens, and they all are happy to help the Templarate and give them deals on goods and services whenever needed. Joe heard that Susie Salarr is pissing on his business, sending all the hunters out to poach the best critters, stake out at the best forage spots, and hoarde the choicest water holes in the scrub, even though Susie's orders have been few and far between. It's obvious she's doing it to try and push Joe out of business. Susie is an Allanak-born Junior Agent, related by blood to House Salarr, but definitely -not- a citizen of Tuluk.
Can Joe arrange for Susie's punishment? If so, does he get a break on the price? If he can't, why not? She's not even a citizen. Her "societal rank" should be lower than his. Or should it?
Edited to suggest: regarding the questions about Joe vs. Susie. What if there were "ranks" of punishment? I mean the whole mandate thing is already pretty convoluted (in my opinion). So if we're going to get detailed and micromanage things - why not do so from the actual contractual end of things as well? Allow lower-society members contract for low-ranking "punishments" on higher-ranking members of society.
So Joe could arrange for a shadow artist to draw silly paintings on the street in front of the Salarr estate, or compose and recite a scathing scolding against Salarr's poaching habits at a public event. But Joe wouldn't be allowed to contract Susie's murder.
Something like that might be more "fun" for everyone involved, rather than a tacit "thou shalt not" and "thou must always."
Quote from: Lizzie on September 29, 2013, 08:58:46 AM
If the Shadow Guild were an off-shoot of the Bards, and the Mediators were Nenyuk agents, I think all of this could work.
On an IC level, why would thieves, killers and thugs be associated with Bards of Poet's Circle so closely, and why would the city entrust the sale of legalized shady contracts to a GMH? On an OOC level, it's clear that the old licensing system as well as the new one is the templarate's admission that bad things are certain to happen, so the law may as well regulate it.
QuoteBut with the templars as the mediators, and Shadow Artists being independent, I don't think it would work. I think people would have too tough of a time to get things started, customers would be hesitant to trust a templar regarding the murder or robbery or "character assassination" of a "true-inked" Tuluki.
Not sure if you (or the plenty of other posters that have mentioned trust) mean IC or OOC trust. ICly, it's been the Lirathan Order's job all along to be trusted with that for years. Your character either trusts the Faithful or is a dissident who is hopefully at least smart enough to pretend. OOCly, if players of Shadow Artists/Agents aren't trusting the templar players to be neutral... too bad? Have some faith in the players and the staff who pick them. Only good players get to become templars, and if they make mistakes I'm sure they are told as much by staff, same as any sponsored role.
The only differences now are that all templars are being trusted with it, and that character assassination to a shady/violent degree is an option.
QuoteI've also noticed a complete lack of consideration for "people of interest" living and working legally in Tuluk, who are not citizens, as targets. Joe Indie is an independent merchant/trader in Tuluk. He's a true-inked citizen, and his employees are all true-inked citizens, and they all are happy to help the Templarate and give them deals on goods and services whenever needed. Joe heard that Susie Salarr is pissing on his business, sending all the hunters out to poach the best critters, stake out at the best forage spots, and hoarde the choicest water holes in the scrub, even though Susie's orders have been few and far between. It's obvious she's doing it to try and push Joe out of business. Susie is an Allanak-born Junior Agent, related by blood to House Salarr, but definitely -not- a citizen of Tuluk.
Can Joe arrange for Susie's punishment? If so, does he get a break on the price? If he can't, why not? She's not even a citizen. Her "societal rank" should be lower than his. Or should it?
The (admittedly old, but hopefully we'll see an update to them) Tuluki caste docs have this nugget:
QuoteThose Great Merchant House employees who are able to claim citizenship may have a slightly higher social status then those who cannot - especially in legal matters. However, since the social power of the Great Merchant House is largely a function of their tremendous wealth and not any perceived quality of character, the differences are minor.
And this one:
QuoteIndependent organizations that are not tied to a city-state but do fall into the place of a merchant house are usually lumped into the "Merchant" subgroup if they are deemed successful and influential enough. A group of hunters would not fall into this category, but a self-made, established organization complete with some sort of noble, templar, or GMH sponsorship would.
So for your example, their societal rank might be about the same if Joe is influential enough or has an infulential patron. If not, he may be S.O.L. At least that will encourage Joe to find a benevolent patron who dislikes Susie.
On greater reflection, I will take this point back as well Nyr.
QuoteAnd, assuming things were put into place to satisfy anybody's worries on the above questions and others...then why in hell would anybody ever want to play a Templar in the north...might as well re-open nenyuk for play at that point, it would be more fun.
It was going under the thought that rules straightjacketing Templars would make the role less fun...but on reflecting on what I think are the best roles to play, the ones that are the most fun are the ones with the clearest documentation often with a great number of clear rules as to how the role should be played...some of which I have had a hand in...along with staff and others.
Over all I like the idea...but I still have doubts as to the Templars being in control or even brokers. I think it would be more viable to have a dedicated clan for such a thing. Sort of like the Fair witness institution from "Stranger in a Strange Land".
Then you would have PCs that everybody, including the Templars KNOW have only one purpose, to protect and promote shadow artistry and Tuluki culture.
The impartial shadow broker.
(BTW, I dreamt about the idea then it took me two days to remember where I got it from...heh)
Quote from: X-D on September 29, 2013, 09:36:13 AM
On greater reflection, I will take this point back as well Nyr.
QuoteAnd, assuming things were put into place to satisfy anybody's worries on the above questions and others...then why in hell would anybody ever want to play a Templar in the north...might as well re-open nenyuk for play at that point, it would be more fun.
It was going under the thought that rules straightjacketing Templars would make the role less fun...but on reflecting on what I think are the best roles to play, the ones that are the most fun are the ones with the clearest documentation often with a great number of clear rules as to how the role should be played...some of which I have had a hand in...along with staff and others.
Over all I like the idea...but I still have doubts as to the Templars being in control or even brokers. I think it would be more viable to have a dedicated clan for such a thing. Sort of like the Fair witness institution from "Stranger in a Strange Land".
Then you would have PCs that everybody, including the Templars KNOW have only one purpose, to protect and promote shadow artistry and Tuluki culture.
The impartial shadow broker.
(BTW, I dreamt about the idea then it took me two days to remember where I got it from...heh)
Brainstorming XD's post, I'm coming up with an expansion to his idea of the Shadow Brokers Union (would very likely have a different name but SBU is easy to type here in this post).
SBU might start out as a single, trusted, uncorruptable, uncorrupted, loyal commoner citizen of Tuluk who has never served in any House or as a partisan of any living potential patron. Possibly a former Legionairre of a modest rank, but no more involved in politics than that. This Leader would need to be an NPC, because he's the first, and someone has to fill the roles with "trusted" seconds. He'd be the initial boss that just gets things started.
Now, we have maybe - 2 or 3 PCs who are SBU members. They have all proven themselves to be trustworthy, and are not presently or *recently* affiliated with any House, and are not presently a partisan to any patron. Recently - would mean - within the last game-year. House would be any noble OR GMH house. These would likely be sponsored roles but it the criteria is met, an existing PC could probably be recruited into it.
The position within the SBU would be as a broker, and as a witness. Anyone wanting a witness for any transaction of any kind, can contract an SBU member to witness it, for a fee. Fees would be determined primarily by the nature of the thing they're witnessing. If they're witnessing a simple bank transaction, maybe it'd just be a mug of ale and fifty sids. If it's witnessing the passage of a parchment of writing from templar to noble, maybe a hundred sids. If it's witnessing a robbery, 200 sids. Witnessing an assassination - 300 sids. That's arbitrary - if the idea is a good one, y'all can flesh that out yourselves. As a witness, the SBU member would keep silent, out of the way, not interfere in any way at all, be on time, leave on time, tell no one, and simply act as witness to events. Either party involved in a transaction can now invoke the witness's name if a conflict comes up regarding the transaction, and the witness must recount what they witnessed. If they are asked to recount it more than once, the witness would be allowed to charge a fee for each additional recounting.
As a broker, the SBU member would accept the contract requirements from the person wanting the contract, determine if the contract meets the criteria involved in contracts, accept it or reject it, and if accepted, arrange for the contract to be carried out by a Shadow Artist. The usual fees would be involved there as well. This -might- or _might not_ also involve the SBU member serving as witness, but perhaps only if the Artist was caught in the act and the templars got involved. Otherwise, the SBU member would be silent, and the two parties would never know about who hired the artist and which artist performed the task. Perhaps a message to the templarate that "a contract involving robbery has been accepted and assigned" with no names mentioned, just so that the templarate knows that somewhere in the city, a legitimate robbery is occuring. So if the artist screws up, they'll know why they have some guy in jail right now. Until that moment, the templarate would not need to know, because it is, afterall, a legitimate robbery.
Can an SBU member be corrupted? For all intents and purposes, no they can't. Technically they can. But they'd have to be *damned* good at judging when they can accept a bribe and when not to, because the consequences would be extreme if their corruption is discovered. Maybe they'd have to get a special ink around their eyes, that marks them as a betrayer of trust, and then be exiled out of the Union. No legal entity in the city would be allowed to employ him legally, for any reason. He would be cast out, but allowed to continue existing in the city. But he wouldn't find an apartment building outside the Warrens that would accept his coin for rent, and perhaps the NPC vendors and merchants would charge him double for buying anything, and offer him half what they offer everyone else. They'd have the equivalent of a Scarlett Letter.
So yes, an SBU member *could* be corrupted. But at great risk, and at extreme cost if they are discovered.
I think there are a few folks who'd jump on a chance to play a role like this - given great responsibility, but also great privilege in being allowed to "obesrve" the inner machinations of Tuluk society without having to manipulate them - or being able to at least -try- to manipulate them if they think they're clever enough to get away with it.
Meanwhile, SBU members could have any guild or subguild that they have karma for - but the most logical ones would be merchants or rangers or other guilds/subguilds with listen and/or hide, simply because they need something to do, and profit from, on down times when they aren't negotiating contracts or witnessing events. SBU members themselves would not be eligible to get licenses as Shadow Artists, but they could be -retired- Shadow Artists. So that gives existing PC "artists" something to reach for if they get tired of robbing apartments all day :)
Can shadow artists only work when contracted? In particular burglars and thieves, are they permitted to do their craft for profit without being contracted?
Quote from: ShaLeah on September 29, 2013, 10:43:35 AM
Can shadow artists only work when contracted? In particular burglars and thieves, are they permitted to do their craft for profit without being contracted?
Only shadow agents take contracts. Thieves and burglars just ply their trade after being registered.
EDIT: Not trade. I mean art :)
It's my understanding that registration as it stands now is going away. You're either a shadow artist or a criminal operating outside the good graces of the templarate.
Quote from: manonfire on September 29, 2013, 11:04:54 AM
It's my understanding that registration as it stands now is going away. You're either a shadow artist or a criminal operating outside the good graces of the templarate.
From the Shadow Artist FAQ:
"How do I become a shadow artist?
Meet with a templar so that you can register with them in private..."
Registration stays. There's IC reasons for all of this I won't get into.
Quote from: janeshephard on September 29, 2013, 11:02:35 AM
Quote from: ShaLeah on September 29, 2013, 10:43:35 AM
Can shadow artists only work when contracted? In particular burglars and thieves, are they permitted to do their craft for profit without being contracted?
Only shadow agents take contracts. Thieves and burglars just ply their trade after being registered.
EDIT: Not trade. I mean art :)
Quote from: manonfire on September 29, 2013, 11:04:54 AM
It's my understanding that registration as it stands now is going away. You're either a shadow artist or a criminal operating outside the good graces of the templarate.
Thieves, burglars, killers and other assorted thugs can be shadow artists. Shadow Agents currently refer to those who hire shadow artists.
The new system lets you be both a shadow artist and a criminal, technically, by doing uncontracted work. A shadow artist with a specialty in theft does not legally have free reign to steal anything. But it seems similar to the old system in that a licensed thief that was caught stealing would be punished (just the punishment was reduced, due to being licensed). With the new system, that reduction doesn't just come from being licensed anymore, with social status factoring more into things. If you don't get caught then the usual IC factors will probably determine whether the Faithful bother to investigate (patronage of the suspect, social status of a person asking a Faithful to investigate, etc.).
OK, I re-read the FAQs and Cutthroats explanation is inline with them.
I thought it was going to be like the current one where thieves just go on thieving.
Quote from: palomar on September 29, 2013, 05:39:39 AM
Who would the Public Face be? Would it be an interesting role to play a Shadow Broker? This isn't stuff the Templarate would outsource to commoners. It's an individual with protection from a high-ranking templar, they can't talk about contract stuff to anyone but the Shadow Agent, the Shadow Artist picked for the contract, and the high-ranking templar who'd most likely be an NPC. They also cannot play politics in regards to contracts.
Furthermore, the Public Face/Shadow Brokers would need to be literate. This isn't some alley mafia, this is a formal Templarate sanctioned institution. Records will be kept. That makes me think the position requires either a House Negean noble or a literate slave scribe. Both would be very restricted roles because you'd know a lot, but you wouldn't be able to put any of it to use. If you leave the brokering role in the hands of Templars, they can't play politics with the specific contracts but they can still use the information in various ways.
My take is that it'd be fun to play a Shadow Artist, having your own clan, compound and all, but it would suck to be a Shadow Broker/Public Face. Someone compared it to House Nenyuk PCs and I don't think that's too far off.
I hear those concerns, palomar. I had the same ones myself. Literacy could be handled a couple ways: they could write contracts in cavilish (since these are basically business deals anyway), the broker could be a slave, or the broker could be someone from the noble caste. As far as playability concerns, I'm hopeful that the SA Guild would have enough other things to do (keeping members in line, clamping down on unlicensed criminals, cleaning up after contracts gone wrong) that the Broker would still have an exciting role to play. If it does end up that they're just a House Nenyuk PC who's only purpose in game is a go-between, something would need to change. What I do think is these problems are all better ones than the problem of mandating templars themselves be fair and uncorrupt.
Quote from: Cutthroat on September 29, 2013, 09:19:30 AM
QuoteBut with the templars as the mediators, and Shadow Artists being independent, I don't think it would work. I think people would have too tough of a time to get things started, customers would be hesitant to trust a templar regarding the murder or robbery or "character assassination" of a "true-inked" Tuluki.
Not sure if you (or the plenty of other posters that have mentioned trust) mean IC or OOC trust. ICly, it's been the Lirathan Order's job all along to be trusted with that for years. Your character either trusts the Faithful or is a dissident who is hopefully at least smart enough to pretend. OOCly, if players of Shadow Artists/Agents aren't trusting the templar players to be neutral... too bad? Have some faith in the players and the staff who pick them. Only good players get to become templars, and if they make mistakes I'm sure they are told as much by staff, same as any sponsored role.
The only differences now are that all templars are being trusted with it, and that character assassination to a shady/violent degree is an option.
I personally am referring to IC trust. History aside for a moment, I just don't like the word "trust" when it comes to a templar. Templars should be feared. They should be people who can screw you over and have no qualms against doing so. Whether or not all Tulukis actually trusted Lirathans in the past (I have my doubts), I think Tuluk is now at a crossroads and this is the perfect time to abolish notions of trustworthy, fair, honest, just templars completely. They of course want to
seem that way to keep up appearances, but this is Tuluk and everyone should know it's not true. Templars just have too much potential to be political, corrupt, conniving assholes to hamstring them with having to fairly and impartially administrate crime like this.
Quote from: Jherlen on September 29, 2013, 11:28:33 AM
I hear those concerns, palomar. I had the same ones myself. Literacy could be handled a couple ways: they could write contracts in cavilish (since these are basically business deals anyway), the broker could be a slave, or the broker could be someone from the noble caste.
It's a literacy problem even if its in Cavilish. Reading and writing is outlawed for commoners. This includes commoner merchants. The only person who could legally take up this role is a noble or a templar.
Quote from: janeshephard on September 29, 2013, 11:31:37 AM
Quote from: Jherlen on September 29, 2013, 11:28:33 AM
I hear those concerns, palomar. I had the same ones myself. Literacy could be handled a couple ways: they could write contracts in cavilish (since these are basically business deals anyway), the broker could be a slave, or the broker could be someone from the noble caste.
It's a literacy problem even if its in Cavilish. Reading and writing is outlawed for commoners. This includes commoner merchants. The only person who could legally take up this role is a noble or a templar.
That's incorrect. Commoner merchants are allowed to have RW Cav. I know for a fact this applies to GMH members, but I believe it also applies for more "minor" merchant houses as well. Since Tuluk is already letting other merchants know Cavilish, there's no reason why they couldn't appropriate it for their own needs, if they needed to.
Quote from: Jherlen on September 29, 2013, 11:33:40 AM
Quote from: janeshephard on September 29, 2013, 11:31:37 AM
Quote from: Jherlen on September 29, 2013, 11:28:33 AM
I hear those concerns, palomar. I had the same ones myself. Literacy could be handled a couple ways: they could write contracts in cavilish (since these are basically business deals anyway), the broker could be a slave, or the broker could be someone from the noble caste.
It's a literacy problem even if its in Cavilish. Reading and writing is outlawed for commoners. This includes commoner merchants. The only person who could legally take up this role is a noble or a templar.
Thats incorrect. Commoner merchants are allowed to have RW Cav. I know for a fact this applies to GMH members, but I believe it also applies for more "minor" merchant houses as well.
Nope. It's illegal. Just because they do it does not mean it's legal.
EDIT: Actually..
" Please note that literacy is illegal or unknown for most people on the
face of Zalanthas. While nobles and templars are trained in the arts of
reading and writing and the Merchant Houses pass along a knowledge of how
to write the trade-ciphers associated with Cavilish to their agents and
merchants, it is considered treason for common citizens to possess such
knowledge within the city-states of Zalanthas."
I'm not sure Cavilish is illegal. Hmm. I'll need to look at my old logs where a staff member at the time clarified this.
Quote from: janeshephard on September 29, 2013, 11:34:13 AM
Quote from: Jherlen on September 29, 2013, 11:33:40 AM
Quote from: janeshephard on September 29, 2013, 11:31:37 AM
Quote from: Jherlen on September 29, 2013, 11:28:33 AM
I hear those concerns, palomar. I had the same ones myself. Literacy could be handled a couple ways: they could write contracts in cavilish (since these are basically business deals anyway), the broker could be a slave, or the broker could be someone from the noble caste.
It's a literacy problem even if its in Cavilish. Reading and writing is outlawed for commoners. This includes commoner merchants. The only person who could legally take up this role is a noble or a templar.
Thats incorrect. Commoner merchants are allowed to have RW Cav. I know for a fact this applies to GMH members, but I believe it also applies for more "minor" merchant houses as well.
Nope. It's illegal. Just because they do it does not mean it's legal.
Trust me, it is not illegal, unless Something Big has changed that wasn't documented anywhere. I've seen merchants who wrote down and signed merchant contracts right in front of templars in both cities. I can name a few templars who would have looooved to kill Rokov Kurac for any excuse, and somehow writing in front of them wasn't an excuse enough.
OK.
Let's move ahead with it being written in Cavilish. You still have a GMH that has the ability to hand out contracts to killers -- some of them being very good. I agree with Palomar it's not suitable.
Going back to the idea of a Templar doing this and always accepting contracts; Templars can fall back on "tradition." That the most important thing in Tuluk, after the Sun King, is the culture. Therefore, as long as a contract does not clearly intervene in Tuluki interests, the contract must be accepted and assigned.
Quote from: janeshephard on September 29, 2013, 11:40:25 AM
OK.
Let's move ahead with it being written in Cavilish. You still have a GMH that has the ability to hand out contracts to killers -- some of them being very good. I agree with Palomar it's not suitable.
I'm sure whatever language things are written in, there'd be more required to forge a contract than just a piece of paper. Special seals, special paper, multiple copies kept in separate places, and so on. There's also the fact that the brokers themselves would realize fairly quickly it wasn't a licensed hit. Forgery wouldn't be impossible, but it doesn't need to be impossible, just really really hard. And it's easy to make it that hard.
QuoteGoing back to the idea of a Templar doing this and always accepting contracts; Templars can fall back on "tradition." That the most important thing in Tuluk, after the Sun King, is the culture. Therefore, as long as a contract does not clearly intervene in Tuluki interests, the contract must be accepted and assigned.
That's where we disagree fundamentally. You're saying all templars should put "Tuluki" interests ahead of everything, I'm saying templars should put
their own interests ahead, or at least side-by-side, while paying lip service to Tuluki tradition and culture. There is no reason Tuluki templars should not be every bit as corrupt and self-serving as Allanaki templars. Tuluki templars have just gotten better about institutionalizing and glossing over their corruption by spouting high ideals and propaganda to the people. Go back to page 3 or 4 where somebody approaches a templar about assassinating the templar's own aide or partisan, who won't be easy to replace. Culture be damned, there is no reason why that templar should be going along with someone who wants to shoot them in their own foot, or why he should stand idly by if he knows another templar is trying. It's a terrible loss for the game to force templars into that position. In a real sense templars are the conflict-drivers and focus points for much of the city. They shouldn't be straightjacketed into being fair in their dealings just to make documentation work.
I was the person who argued that Templars would be corrupt. That corruption can stop at tradition. And if he is your patron and you get a contract request for him? YOU HAVE TO accept the contract and make sure its sent up to the best to show you are sticking by the traditions.
It's like the local police in a small town. If the feds show up with a warrant for someone, they can't cover it up anymore. At some stage they have to do their job properly or they'll be held accountable.
Quote from: janeshephard on September 29, 2013, 12:14:09 PM
I was the person who argued that Templars would be corrupt. That corruption can stop at tradition.
It's like the local police in a small town. If the feds show up with a warrant for someone, they can't cover it up anymore. At some stage they have to do their job properly or they'll be held accountable.
I think culture, tradition, custom and all that should play a backseat role to ambition, selfishness, and greed. That sounds more Zalanthan to me. Tuluki templars can make public noise about upholding tradition how they want; in reality the traditions are whatever they say they are, and can be changed at any time, and anyone who says differently can be disappeared. No high-minded ideals or abstract traditions should stop corruption; the only thing stopping corruption should be what a templar thinks he can get away with without making it obvious and without somebody smacking him down.
The local police in a small town are accountable to the feds because the feds are a higher law. To a templar, the only higher law is Muk Utep and senior templars, because they can kill lower templars if they don't walk the line. And Muk and the senior templars do not and should not have a single fuck to give about how assassin contracts are handled as long as the templarate maintains order.
I'm not sure how reading and writing came into this being a requirement for a Shadow Broker, when commoner merchants have kept track of complex orders for years on end relying on "memory" alone. Meaning the record-keeping taking place OOC, reports sent in if required, and handled as a keen IC memory. The city itself has a number of virtual scribes, unaffiliated to Chosen Houses, who keep records and write missives for the Faithful. The sending of reports, which would be required anyway, could be seen as dictation to a slave scribe of the city for the purpose of record-keeping.
However, given this would be a sponsored role for essentially a civic servant, entrusted with the fair overseeing of literally life and death, I'm fairly certain they could also be granted R/W in Sirihish or any other language, all in the interest of better serving the city. Much like literate slaves are entrusted with such knowledge in order to assist the administration of the city. Whether knowing to read and write is illegal for a commoner doesn't seem that big an issue, when discussing a system that essentially legalizes most every criminal activity. A Shadow Broker would already be offered an extreme measure of trust by the government, simply in performing their duties faithfully and with discretion. Tacking on R/W to that trust and obligation doesn't seem a stretch.
All this assuming written records should be kept in the first place, given the sensitive nature of the contracts. Which I'm not quite sold on personally.
Yeah, Ouro - I could see it both ways. Written records would be handy, but aren't essential. I had brainstormed up the idea of shadow artists getting a written, sealed note to leave at the scene of the crime for the militia to find, noting the hit was "legal" in such cases when public notice was asked for or unavoidable. But you certainly wouldn't need that.
One thing I know for certain, the inability to refuse contracts removes any professionalism from this system.
Regardless of what a templar may think, I may know I can't complete a certain job in an acceptable manner.
It's an unbearably unpleasant system to work under.
That alone would stop me from considering such a thing.
Who knows what the Templars agenda is...what better way to get rid of a problem give them "An offer they cannot refuse".
GMH members knowing cavilish is technically illegal. But is Amos the Templar really going to bust on in and cause a big ruckus with one of the most powerful entities of the Known because some of their members can read and write?
Quote from: X-D on September 29, 2013, 03:28:20 PM
That alone would stop me from considering such a thing.
Who knows what the Templars agenda is...what better way to get rid of a problem give them "An offer they cannot refuse".
Yah, there's a built-in high turnover rate. If an apprentice receives a few jobs he can't do, he's essentially ejected from the system because his skills have a random chance of success.
Whew! Why did I wait for this to be 16 pages to respond? I need to get in on the first page so there's not as much to read.
Anyway, I think this has a lot of really cool potential for Tuluk. I look foward to participating in this in-game at some point.
As far as documentation goes, I agree with some previous comments that two of the aspects that would need clear guidelines are pricing (although that wouldn't necessarily be in public docs) and how corruption could affect things. Templars are bound to have conflicts of interest, but I think that's okay as long as their players know the boundaries of what flexibility they have or don't have in roleplaying as brokers to this system.
One of the restrictions listed for shadow artists says that contracts against members of the Legion are only allowed if they "do not cause harm." Maybe this is nitpicking, but I wonder if this should be clarified to specify "physical harm" (unless that's not what is meant). So damaging a Legionaire's reputation may be acceptable but not breaking their arm.
I'm hoping that when this is in place, there would be a contacts sought in a variety of types at a range of difficulties. It seems like that's what this is going for, which I think would be a lot of fun.
If you work for the templarate, not being able to refuse is intrinsic. The arm of the dragon and the sun legions are no different in that regard, so being a shadow artist is merely yet another extension of the templarate's will.
Quote from: Patuk on September 29, 2013, 04:11:36 PM
If you work for the templarate, not being able to refuse is intrinsic. The arm of the dragon and the sun legions are no different in that regard, so being a shadow artist is merely yet another extension of the templarate's will.
But you don't, and it isn't. You work for the agent, or your patron, and in a larger sense, the city itself. You provide the city with a clean and efficient way of dealing with otherwise messy situation. You're not an extension of the Templar's will, even if the system remains as proposed with Templars acting as brokers. Which I really hope it doesn't.
For the idea that it should be non-templar shadow brokers, I see two potential problem areas:
If the shadow brokers were not templars, how would they avoid arm-twisting by the templarate? Or the nobility, for that matter?
Also, if there's one sponsored role for a (non-templar) shadow broker, is that character going to be available enough to meet with all the artists and agents for every contract?
Quote from: Jherlen on September 29, 2013, 11:33:40 AM
Quote from: janeshephard on September 29, 2013, 11:31:37 AM
Quote from: Jherlen on September 29, 2013, 11:28:33 AM
I hear those concerns, palomar. I had the same ones myself. Literacy could be handled a couple ways: they could write contracts in cavilish (since these are basically business deals anyway), the broker could be a slave, or the broker could be someone from the noble caste.
It's a literacy problem even if its in Cavilish. Reading and writing is outlawed for commoners. This includes commoner merchants. The only person who could legally take up this role is a noble or a templar.
That's incorrect. Commoner merchants are allowed to have RW Cav. I know for a fact this applies to GMH members, but I believe it also applies for more "minor" merchant houses as well. Since Tuluk is already letting other merchants know Cavilish, there's no reason why they couldn't appropriate it for their own needs, if they needed to.
My understanding is that Cavilish is -known- to be a bunch of accounting marks. The sort of thing you'd use to keep track of goods and make marks denoting prices and quantities of goods, not the sort of thing you'd use for fine wording. Not poetry, stories, histories or anything with nuance. (Sorry for the derail.)
Templar arm twisting is simple to stop...simply document it...there are some things that can be that easy.
Docs: If a Templar or noble is found to be twisting the arm of a shadow broker/witness, muk will oust them powerless into the known, never to enter the walls again.
or
It is known that the citizens will never willingly interact with said Templar ever again...easy way to force storage there.
Point being, it is easy enough to set it up so that these people be sacrosanct in the performance of duties...even to the templarate.
BTW, this still leaves the Templars in charge, as they would need be the final arbitars in any dispute...such disputes would also of course cost the loser...in coin or whatever.
May be I've just been playing in Allanak too long, but we're worried about Templar corruption? Really? If you want the Templars to behave in the exactly proscribed manner every time, just automate the process of getting a contract. I can't see that being very fun for them.
Question:
Quote from: BadSkeelz on September 29, 2013, 05:06:37 PM
May be I've just been playing in Allanak too long, but we're worried about Templar corruption? Really? If you want the Templars to behave in the exactly proscribed manner every time, just automate the process of getting a contract. I can't see that being very fun for them.
Answers:
Quote from: Dalmeth on September 29, 2013, 03:24:20 PM
One thing I know for certain, the inability to refuse contracts removes any professionalism from this system.
Regardless of what a templar may think, I may know I can't complete a certain job in an acceptable manner.
It's an unbearably unpleasant system to work under.
Quote from: X-D on September 29, 2013, 03:28:20 PM
That alone would stop me from considering such a thing.
Who knows what the Templars agenda is...what better way to get rid of a problem give them "An offer they cannot refuse".
I'm sorry but they're Templars. They can already get rid of you if they need to, and they don't have to go through some complicated scheme of hiring you to do it. Tempalrs are Deus Ex Machina.
Want to look good and remain somewhat legal to Templars as a sneaky lawbreaker of some sort at the risk of powerful people being able to use you as they will? Use this system.
Want to get around the troubles of being a sneaky lawbreaker who might oust them self or otherwise draw attention they don't want, don't use the system.
I don't get why people think their nobody commoner assassin should be able to refuse anything a Templar tells them to do.
If "because the templar says so" is all that is needed, then it seems to be something already in play - and no intricate second layer of "you have to" is needed.
But that isn't what this is about.
If this moves away from Templars, they have one less task to do.
Quote from: Outrider on September 29, 2013, 06:03:02 PM
If "because the templar says so" is all that is needed, then it seems to be something already in play - and no intricate second layer of "you have to" is needed.
But that isn't what this is about.
No, it's about people wanting to be Assassins/Thieves/Burglar of the State without even so much a hint that that sort of character should suffer consequences. Isn't everyone worried that they won't play these Shadow Artists because people might know who they are, and be able to influence them?
Well what's the other option? To have a Shadow Artist who is completely autonomous/anonymous and has no fear of anyone above them in station. Basically a regular old Assassin in Allanak, but one who is constantly being fed jobs by the Templarate/nobles/merchants... And who doens't have to worry about putting their name otu there and getting caught.
Well GEE that does sound fun... But it also sounds like Armageddon Easy-mode.
Quote from: flurry on September 29, 2013, 04:32:56 PMIf the shadow brokers were not templars, how would they avoid arm-twisting by the templarate? Or the nobility, for that matter?
As X-D said, that's simply a matter of documentation. Tuluk is built on traditions and protocol, and both Chosen and Faithful would more than likely respect the position a Shadow Broker is in. Because they'd know its cuts both ways if nothing else, meaning if they try to strong-arm a Broker, someone else could also try to strong-arm one against them. This also works particularly well if Templars aren't exempt from contracts. That way keeping the playing field level is to everyone's advantage. And at the end of a day, every Templar has superiors who would be more than happy to hear of any strong-arming attempts of a Shadow Broker, should one misstep.
Quote from: flurry on September 29, 2013, 04:32:56 PMAlso, if there's one sponsored role for a (non-templar) shadow broker, is that character going to be available enough to meet with all the artists and agents for every contract?
More than likely, yes. Another could always be brought in if there's overwhelming demand, but really it's no different than trying to hunt down the one or two active Templars in any given city. That's something for staff to assess though, and really not something that should give us pause in discussing the idea at this stage of development. Or in other words, if the only issue we have with Shadow Brokers not being Templars is whether it'll be one or two PCs, I think we're on a good path.
Quote from: RogueGunslinger on September 29, 2013, 05:51:54 PM
I'm sorry but they're Templars. They can already get rid of you if they need to, and they don't have to go through some complicated scheme of hiring you to do it. Tempalrs are Deus Ex Machina.
It's always preferable in Tuluk to not have attention drawn to you when it comes to violent acts. It's always preferable for a Templar to put out a contract on you than execute you (although they will certainly do that as well).
Quote
Want to look good and remain somewhat legal to Templars as a sneaky lawbreaker of some sort at the risk of powerful people being able to use you as they will? Use this system.
Want to get around the troubles of being a sneaky lawbreaker who might oust them self or otherwise draw attention they don't want, don't use the system.
Which is why I think straight up execution for repeat offenders, even if it's a petty crime, should go into the Tuluki law books. No more being nice and registering the offender. Ignorance is no excuse, unless we clearly have a new player who didn't know.
Not registering should be the same as committing treason. Unless the murder is accidental, if you don't have your paperwork in order you should join your victim. That will bring inline the oppression of Tuluk, and make the registering laws relevant. Finally, this should be done
publicly or frankly, no one will care.
I always figured whenever a Templar told you to do something or 'offered' a job, it was basically a 'you cannot refuse' issue anyway. I mean... who tells the agents of a bad-tempered physical god "No"?
Quote from: janeshephard on September 29, 2013, 07:01:15 PM
Quote from: RogueGunslinger on September 29, 2013, 05:51:54 PM
I'm sorry but they're Templars. They can already get rid of you if they need to, and they don't have to go through some complicated scheme of hiring you to do it. Tempalrs are Deus Ex Machina.
It's always preferable in Tuluk to not have attention drawn to you when it comes to violent acts. It's always preferable for a Templar to put out a contract on you than execute you (although they will certainly do that as well).
Quote
Want to look good and remain somewhat legal to Templars as a sneaky lawbreaker of some sort at the risk of powerful people being able to use you as they will? Use this system.
Want to get around the troubles of being a sneaky lawbreaker who might oust them self or otherwise draw attention they don't want, don't use the system.
Which is why I think straight up execution for repeat offenders, even if it's a petty crime, should go into the Tuluki law books. No more being nice and registering the offender. Ignorance is no excuse, unless we clearly have a new player who didn't know.
Not registering should be the same as committing treason. Unless the murder is accidental, if you don't have your paperwork in order you should join your victim. That will bring inline the oppression of Tuluk, and make the registering laws relevant. Finally, this should be done publicly or frankly, no one will care.
i bet you're that guy who puts 3000 coin bounties on pickpockets for stealing your dagger
Quote from: flurry on September 29, 2013, 04:32:56 PM
For the idea that it should be non-templar shadow brokers, I see two potential problem areas:
If the shadow brokers were not templars, how would they avoid arm-twisting by the templarate? Or the nobility, for that matter?
Much the same way the GMH agents and the Guild and other types can avoid arm-twisting; they have a powerful organization behind them, stronger than the influence of any PC noble or templar.
Quote
Also, if there's one sponsored role for a (non-templar) shadow broker, is that character going to be available enough to meet with all the artists and agents for every contract?
That's a good question. There might need to be more than one. There might even need to be a way to set up contracts without having to meet the shadow broker directly. This is something we'd have to be careful of. At the same time, at least this would be the only thing the shadow brokers have to do. Having templars handle all this wouldn't reduce the amount of effort involved at all. So when janeshephard says,
Quote from: janeshephard on September 29, 2013, 06:13:00 PM
If this moves away from Templars, they have one less task to do.
I say yeah, and that's probably a good thing. I doubt templars are really suffering from too little to do.
I really doubt we're going to go with a third party group created just to handle one thing in one city-state. It works structurally within the templarate already now. Expanding what it can do and defining some rules around what each party is expected to do (even if we allow corruption, cheating, whatever on different ends) doesn't mean we need a separate group maintaining the system.
No group in a city-state should be beyond the power of the templarate of that city-state--including individual nobles or templars. If the goal is to use this as a way to collect coin, manage "organized" crime, and collect intel on who is doing what, where, and why, it is a goal served best by direct templar management. That is the goal of the templarate in this case.
Right now I'm compiling a list of the ideas we really liked, the ones that are so-so and in between, and the ones that are definitely no-go's so that the staff team can review and then see what we want to tweak.
Dang. Well, I tried. ;)
Looking forward to the next round, Nyr. Thanks for taking all the input!
I tried to implement a "thief's guild" type of structure many moons ago in game, in character, and the copper war got in the way of implementing it.
I really like this. I like this so much I might make a thief character in Tuluk.
Quote from: mansa on September 29, 2013, 09:24:25 PM
I really like this. I like this so much I might make a thief character in Tuluk.
Quote from: Nyr on September 29, 2013, 08:33:40 PMI really doubt we're going to go with a third party group created just to handle one thing in one city-state. It works structurally within the templarate already now. Expanding what it can do and defining some rules around what each party is expected to do (even if we allow corruption, cheating, whatever on different ends) doesn't mean we need a separate group maintaining the system.
If this is to be kept in the hands of Templars, then abuse of the system should be explicitly forbidden in the documentation and no leeway for corruption offered. It will likely still happen, for various reasons, but at that point it will be up to staff to enforce said documentation. Permitting corruption on the Templar's end is only desirable if they're not the Brokers, because remaining unbiased would fall on the shoulders of a third party, leaving Templars to be as corrupt as they like.
If the few of us trying to present arguments for a third party haven't convinced you, then I would once again ask to take you up on your offer to share the Templar's side of the documentation. That way perhaps those of us with strong hesitations on this can be convinced of your own case in favor of Templar mediation.
Quote from: Nyr on September 29, 2013, 08:33:40 PMNo group in a city-state should be beyond the power of the templarate of that city-state--including individual nobles or templars. If the goal is to use this as a way to collect coin, manage "organized" crime, and collect intel on who is doing what, where, and why, it is a goal served best by direct templar management. That is the goal of the templarate in this case.
Is that the goal, however? It would be if this was a racket implemented by the Templars, certainly. The goal in that case would be for Templars to line their pockets, collect information and dirt to use or abuse, and bring a large portion of the criminal element working for them instead of in spite of them. Is that what's desired though? And I question that both from an OOC standpoint, as well as what might serve the city best from an IC standpoint.
Or is this more a time-honored tradition evolving into simply a more structured and elegant form? A tradition that has as much to do with peacekeeping as it does with public appearances and an artist's eternal search of perfection? A way for disputes to be settled quietly and efficiently, with the social castes and the status they offer adhered to? Is this something meant to serve Templars, or Tuluki society as a whole?
The Faithful have no great need of further methods in gaining information. I won't go into details since that's apparently delving into IC territory, but anyone unaware of my meaning will just have to accept the fact that the Northern Templars are already far too overpowered in that area. Coin? I hardly think that's a problem for them either, and they already have several lovely rackets going which I once again can't discuss. As for crime being managed... It'll happen through this system one way or another, the only question is whether Shadow Artists will end up serving the Templars or Tuluki Society as a whole. But organized crime being largely controlled is the inevitable and desired outcome of this any which way you cut it.
You should decide if this system is meant to serve Agents and Artists, or Templars, and go from there. It can't serve both, unless a third, neutral party is placed in charge, in which case it can serve all. Barring that though, the needs of the Faithful differ vastly from the needs of everyone else, including both Agents and Artists, and while on paper it might seem like a perfect balance can be achieved... In practice it will always tip in the Templar's favor. So from a balance stand-point, as well as a thematic one, do we need to give Templars in the North even more power than they already hold? Or should this instead be a way to breath new life into a tradition that's failed to see use by those it's intended to serve to begin with?
Quote from: Nyr on September 29, 2013, 08:33:40 PMRight now I'm compiling a list of the ideas we really liked, the ones that are so-so and in between, and the ones that are definitely no-go's so that the staff team can review and then see what we want to tweak.
Definitely looking forward to your feedback and thoughts, as you and other staff members go over this list. And while it's been said by many already, I'll go ahead and echo it as well on the record... It's great to see the level of transparency and involvement you've offered the community in this project. I hope it proves a great case-study in paving the way towards more open communication and collaboration between staff and players in future projects, as IC matters permit.
Maybe a little clarification is needed on one point because there's concern that templars won't handle stuff properly, that they're biased, that they have issues, etc. So...as an example...here's how it was handled
before, back when there were two Orders. These are practices as of two weeks ago and for years before that.
(Thanks to the PC templar that put this together!)
Quote
Lirathans (brokers) meet with the hiring party (Shadow Agents) and listen to their request for a contract. The hiring party can either request a specific Artist (usually an employee) or ask the Lirathan to find a suitable Artist. The contract fee is determined, although the Artist's fee is added later (requiring the Lirathan to contact the hiring party again before sealing the deal). A suitable Artist is approached and asked to take the contract and name their fee. If they decline to take the contract they are warned not to speak of it to anyone (not always adhered to by Artists) or face the consequences. In the case of an Artist not employed by the hiring party, there is a double-blind and neither party is aware of each other's identity. Artists cannot approach the Lirathans on behalf of a hiring party, nor can they arrange contracts on their own behalf.
Requested contracts are never refused as long as the target is valid. Invalid targets include Legionnaires, Faithful and Chosen (unless hiring party has enough social rank to take out a hit on a noble). Inability to pay the determined fee is also grounds for rejection. The Lirathan broker may adjust the contract fee to suit the hiring party's social rank as well as that of the target's. Individuals important to the Ivory and to the Lirathan will be very expensive to take out contracts on. Most contracts have a time limit. Separate but similar contracts can be issued if the hiring party wants more than one of their artists to cooperate. It is not possible to buy immunity to assassination from the Faithful.
When everything has been agreed on and coins have changed hands, the Artist receives a written license to kill the target. Once the deed is done, the scroll is returned to the Lirathan who issued it. If the assassination was flawed, the Artist is corrected as seen fit.
Lirathans, and Jihaens, are not allowed to share information on contracts outside of the Templarate. They are not allowed to warn the target or to otherwise interfere with the contract once issued. Concerned employers with sufficient social rank might get a "Yes it was licensed" if they inquire about a dead employee - which basically helps promote the system (and it promotes plots/paranoia without giving away protected Templar-only information).
The Faithful do not interfere with the contracts, nor do they disappear assassins targeting their pets. The Faithful have good reasons to have faith in and protect the system of licensed assassination (and theft) because it keeps the unlicensed crime down, brings them income with little effort, lets them keep track of hits and feuds, and promotes culture/art which the city appreciates and thrives on. In the rare event of a Faithful stepping over the line, harsh punishment and correction awaits. In addition, their peers will have less trust in them and their dealings. Lirathans are closely monitored by their superiors to make sure they don't issue flawed or biased contracts, and that they pick suitable artists for the jobs.
What we're suggesting here as documentation is not
very far from how we were running this already. There are some differences. The major differences:
--the double blind is
required, even if it is only a formality (in the case of a partisan artist)
--artist ranks are formalized and coupled with tattoos
--payscales raised and matched to artist rank, difficulty of the job, quality of work required, or special requests for the work required (not that pay was shit before, but documentation-wise, it was)
--no artist is
entirely devoted to their patron; they will do work for the city-state as needed regardless of their rank as an artist (this prevents patrons from sucking up all of the interested PCs in such a field; while that might keep THEM safe, it still allows artist work to be done throughout the rest of the city)
--if an artist is a Master, they can be given a contract against employers/patrons if they do have one (if they aren't a Master, they won't ever be used against their own patron/organization)
Things I personally think are good ideas to add to what has been seen so far, but will be reviewed by the staff team:
- make sure players are aware that there are certainly OOC and even IC/OOC mixed up reasons for why a contract could not be taken OR completed. I.E., artist player is about to go on vacation, target stopped playing, timezone/playtime arrangement difficulties, etc.
- develop the rank chart further and move it to the new website.
- Give some examples of potential contracts apart from the stuff that has been done before. Things that go beyond "steal stuff" and "kill dude." Players can be very imaginative, but you can't read our minds on what we think is "imaginative" with regards to an open-ended system.
- Specify that patrons really should be skimming off of the jobs their partisan artists do for "the system." I.E., "oh you did some work. I expect my cut in exchange for you keeping your position here. I don't care what you did, I just want my money."
Things for review (i.e. we will discuss some more staff-side):
- training and such -- how to address the situation without forcing players into silly justification games for working on skills
- Decide how far to let templars go with regards to corruption within this system (not in general, we are fine with corrupt templars and are trying to create an environment for that in Tuluk, but traditionally this system has worked without overt manipulation in the past)
- acceptance cant -- ritualized way to handle becoming an artist, accepting tasks, etc as this is part of tradition
- defining unlicensed crime a bit better even if it's just to vaguely acknowledge its existence as something to be "stamped out"
- consider better refund rates for tasks completely screwed up
- consider situations that might require (or in which an artist might request) multiple artists for assistance
Also, a brief look at what we've laid out for templars as part of the same proposal. There are things not part of this since this is a FAQ, not really the usual sort of doc (we need a basic pay scale recommendation, and we need a guideline for what justifies rank increases, and some other stuff that needs to be discussed staff-side).
QuoteSo You Want To Rule The Artists...
You're a templar in Tuluk. You've got this thing in the bag. Time to learn how to do it right!
What do I do in this system?
The templarate is the broker for shadow artists. Any of that sort of thing must come through you. There is no contract work pursued outside of what you authorize. In its simplest form, a contracting agent meets with you. They tell you what they want done against someone. You tell them how much it will cost. They pay you. You pick an artist from a list of artists, and provided they can handle the job, you send them on their way after paying them half up front. When they're done, you pay them the other half.
What's in it for the templarate?
In a word: money. In another word: information. You get paid to broker the deal and maintain the anonymity of the contract (in most cases). You get the information, knowing who is having what issues with what person. This information is useful to a templarate interested in keeping tabs on everyone.
Can I say no to a contract?
Generally, no, you can't. There are two reasons to say no to a contract.
- Social rank/caste. If the contracting agent is lower in rank/caste than their intended target, the contract must be rejected.
- Templarate and Legion immunity from harm. While there may be opportunity for a contract that serves to teach a lesson or that serves to act as a prank, any contract that intends physical harm to a templar or a soldier must be rejected. At any rate, it would take a templar to do that in the first place.
But they're wanting to kill a friend of mine...I like that guy, why can't I deny the contract?
While you do control the price (to a large extent) and the artist selection (to a large extent), you have to accept that this system is intended to function THROUGH the templarate. Besides, you're one of His Faithful, how do you have time for friends? You're not an automaton, you don't have to like it, but you do know how the system is supposed to work.
Are you saying I could price a contracting agent out of a contract, or pick an artist I know will fail?
If you feel there is a case to be made for someone's contract to be reviewed, let us know. Otherwise, you should stick to the guidelines and broker the artists rather than play politics with the contracts you get.
How do I register an artist?
Meet with them privately and ensure they actually understand what they are getting into with this shadow artist thing. While you will do what you can to only give them work they can complete, they will be challenged at times by what they are given. They cannot refuse a contract. They do not talk about their contracts to unauthorized people. If you're up for it and if the need arises, you can also seek out prospective artists on your own. A minimum amount of active artists are needed to do the work that we expect will be called for by this system.
Chosen Lord So-and-so has a lower or mid-ranked artist working directly for him and wants to designate a contract to her...how do I proceed?
You tell him how much it costs and you accept his money to pay for the contract. You contact his artist and let her know what to do, and also that this is a patron contract. This means that the patron can guide them with regards to how to pursue the contract, as well.
Chosen Lord So-and-so has a lower or mid-ranked artist working directly for him, and I think the artist is ready to become a fully fledged shadow artist of the highest rank...how do I proceed?
First, run it by staff. This is a new system, after all. Assuming all pans out and we agree that they've done good work, meet with the artist privately. Explain to them that you feel their talents are exceptional and deserve reward in the form of another rank. However, they must know that with this rank comes additional responsibility: they are loyal to Tuluk first and foremost. Any ties of employment or partisanship are second to the city. This may mean that their ties of employment will clash with their ties to the city (in other words, they may be used against their own employer). If they agree that this is fine, great--ink them on up and now they're free to use for that kind of stuff in case it comes up. If they do not agree, then they may not proceed any higher in rank, for they have not passed the test of loyalty to the city.
I've got a contract from someone to kill Chosen Lord So-and-so...do I have to use that aforementioned well-placed artist, or can I use someone else?
Up to you. Generally, you should use the best artist for the job. In this case, the best artist is the one that is allowed through the gate. Chosen Lord So-and-so knew what he was getting into by employing this artist! Sometimes, the risks outweigh the rewards...
An artist really screwed up, and I mean horribly...what do I do to punish them?
They knew going into it that screwing up can mean punishment. We'll lay out some documentation on possible punishments. Right now, you know that the range of it can be minor (fines or even a whipping) to major (removal from artistry, disappearance).
An artist is talking too much, telling everyone what they did on their last contract...what do I...?
They aren't disappeared yet? Snap to it, you've got a job to do!
So being journeyman forever is OK?
Quote from: Nyr on September 29, 2013, 09:51:38 PM
Maybe a little clarification is needed on one point because there's concern that templars won't handle stuff properly, that they're biased, that they have issues, etc. So...as an example...here's how it was handled before, back when there were two Orders. These are practices as of two weeks ago and for years before that.
(Thanks to the PC templar that put this together!)
Quote
Lirathans (brokers) meet with the hiring party (Shadow Agents) and listen to their request for a contract. The hiring party can either request a specific Artist (usually an employee) or ask the Lirathan to find a suitable Artist. The contract fee is determined, although the Artist's fee is added later (requiring the Lirathan to contact the hiring party again before sealing the deal). A suitable Artist is approached and asked to take the contract and name their fee. If they decline to take the contract they are warned not to speak of it to anyone (not always adhered to by Artists) or face the consequences. In the case of an Artist not employed by the hiring party, there is a double-blind and neither party is aware of each other's identity. Artists cannot approach the Lirathans on behalf of a hiring party, nor can they arrange contracts on their own behalf.
Requested contracts are never refused as long as the target is valid. Invalid targets include Legionnaires, Faithful and Chosen (unless hiring party has enough social rank to take out a hit on a noble). Inability to pay the determined fee is also grounds for rejection. The Lirathan broker may adjust the contract fee to suit the hiring party's social rank as well as that of the target's. Individuals important to the Ivory and to the Lirathan will be very expensive to take out contracts on. Most contracts have a time limit. Separate but similar contracts can be issued if the hiring party wants more than one of their artists to cooperate. It is not possible to buy immunity to assassination from the Faithful.
When everything has been agreed on and coins have changed hands, the Artist receives a written license to kill the target. Once the deed is done, the scroll is returned to the Lirathan who issued it. If the assassination was flawed, the Artist is corrected as seen fit.
Lirathans, and Jihaens, are not allowed to share information on contracts outside of the Templarate. They are not allowed to warn the target or to otherwise interfere with the contract once issued. Concerned employers with sufficient social rank might get a "Yes it was licensed" if they inquire about a dead employee - which basically helps promote the system (and it promotes plots/paranoia without giving away protected Templar-only information).
The Faithful do not interfere with the contracts, nor do they disappear assassins targeting their pets. The Faithful have good reasons to have faith in and protect the system of licensed assassination (and theft) because it keeps the unlicensed crime down, brings them income with little effort, lets them keep track of hits and feuds, and promotes culture/art which the city appreciates and thrives on. In the rare event of a Faithful stepping over the line, harsh punishment and correction awaits. In addition, their peers will have less trust in them and their dealings. Lirathans are closely monitored by their superiors to make sure they don't issue flawed or biased contracts, and that they pick suitable artists for the jobs.
What we're suggesting here as documentation is not very far from how we were running this already.
Wow, thanks for sharing this. I've been playing in Tuluk for the last few years, and I didn't know that this was how it was done at all. Knowledge is power!
Looks good actually.
Couple of questions:
I'm assuming legionaries still can't become shadow artists? I'm assuming they can skirt the system to a degree and act on their own to bully or intimidate outside of being a shadow artist. Just because they are corrupt militia.
Chosen Lord is being bothered/insulted by blah and wants revenge. Whats the incentive for a templar to broker the contract when they can just disappear or take care of the problem themselves? Leaders have a tendency of playing mother hen already. And why use the rook when you already are a queen.
Its about sending a message not clearing a threat.
Nyr, this looks good, but as I've mentioned in my previous posts, I think it's a shame to make Tuluki templars bound by the system and apolitical. Quotes like these kind of make me sad (sad parts in bold.)
Quote from: Nyr on September 29, 2013, 10:02:15 PM
But they're wanting to kill a friend of mine...I like that guy, why can't I deny the contract?
While you do control the price (to a large extent) and the artist selection (to a large extent), you have to accept that this system is intended to function THROUGH the templarate. Besides, you're one of His Faithful, how do you have time for friends? You're not an automaton, you don't have to like it, but you do know how the system is supposed to work.
Are you saying I could price a contracting agent out of a contract, or pick an artist I know will fail?
If you feel there is a case to be made for someone's contract to be reviewed, let us know. Otherwise, you should stick to the guidelines and broker the artists rather than play politics with the contracts you get.
I still think having templars be self-serving and governed by their own ambitions first, and tradition second (as long as they aren't breaking traditions in a public way) would be better. But oh well.
Couple things you might wanna clarify:
- Can templars "amend" a contract another templar has negotiated? Say Faithful Lady Talia sets up a contract on Amos, Faithful Lord Mailk's partisan, for 2000 sid. Since Malik says Amos is "Useful to His Ivory", can Malik up that fee to 5000, when he hears about it?
- Who gets to be the judge how "well" the contract was executed? The first templar on the scene, the one who negotiated the contract? Is there an objective standard or can templars help/hurt shadow artists by ignoring/noticing details as they like?
Quote from: HavokBlue on September 29, 2013, 07:40:42 PM
i bet you're that guy who puts 3000 coin bounties on pickpockets for stealing your dagger
There has been discussion of utilization. If players are going to kill/steal it is far better to encourage them to do it within a system in Tuluk.
Want mayhem and chaos? It's called Allanak.
Nyr. I'm sorry, but this thread got so big, I'm amazed you're keeping up with it all. I've stopped long time ago.
Overall, I love the initiative and how it is being handled, I cant wait for you guys to mull over ideas and suggestions and general feedback and hopefully, letting us pick apart and gnaw on whatever is the finished product some more.
Personally, I'm going to stop reading majority of the posts, because ... I am losing track. There's too much.
I wish Nyr and others helping him great luck. I hope this system will work. Who knows, maybe I'll even have some chara give it a try, someday.
Quote from: Dar on September 29, 2013, 11:50:14 PM
Nyr. I'm sorry, but this thread got so big, I'm amazed you're keeping up with it all. I've stopped long time ago.
QFT for truth.
It's likely been covered, and I probably just missed it.
Can templars in any way, shape, or form, -acceptably- give away information about what was done or by whom, to anyone?
Nyr: It tickles the bottom of my stony heartstrings to see you actually modifying and planning with the feedback. I appreciate what you do, even when I come in as a dissenter. :D
Quote from: Nyr on September 29, 2013, 09:51:38 PM
Maybe a little clarification is needed on one point because there's concern that templars won't handle stuff properly, that they're biased, that they have issues, etc. So...as an example...here's how it was handled before, back when there were two Orders. These are practices as of two weeks ago and for years before that.
(Thanks to the PC templar that put this together!)
Quote
Invalid targets include Legionnaires, Faithful and Chosen (unless hiring party has enough social rank to take out a hit on a noble).
Hey! Legionnaires could be targetted too. I know mine was at least. Though granted my legionnaire was still a recruit and was killed by someone (a higher ranking legionnaire) who had alot of IC history with the faithful lady in question so they kinda had the social rank to pull it off, I assume. However, this was years ago though alot of things changed since then so it might be true now. I do also remember becoming a licensed thief once too and the faithful lady told me not to target a specific building because all her partisons lived there. That was years and years ago though which made it suck a bit more than it even would now since it was before more expensive apartments buildings where added to tuluk.
All that said I have faith that the templars will be able to maintain the system, what I have a harder time believing is that there will be room for unlicensed crime to florish. I feel one bored templar will still be able to completely eradicate crime in tuluk not to mention the fact that not following the system might be considered treasonous. To me this adds another barrier to being a true criminal . I generally feel most tulukians are taught/forced or are naturally patriotic to the Ivory and sometimes as an extention to the faithful lords and ladies. If you aren't,you might disappear after all. I rather not see being a true criminal in tuluk the equivalent of making a half-elf mage from the rinth your lover. Thats problably the biggest reason I would like someone other than the faithful lord or ladies dealing with the system so it doesn't seem as treasonous or unpatriotic not to use it. However, instead of a third party, maybe just a shift in thinking might be enough? Equally just because you may be greedy, corupt or selfish shouldn't mean you are a total traitor to your city and/or culture.
I think this has been said before though, and alot of work and effort is being put into the new system so I digress. Besides regardless of what is decided, it'll be interesting to see how it all turns out once it is implemented. :)
It always bothers me when Templars in either city accuse petty criminals of treason or "crimes against the Highlord himself!"
That poor common peasant you don't give a shit about stole something you don't give a shit about from some other poor common peasant you don't give a shit about. Better call for air support.
I'm just curious- as to the outrage over not being able to kill a templar...
Has anyone ever bought a contract for a Faithful to be murdered, from another Faithful? The way the system currently stands, you -still- have to go through the Faithful to order a hit on one, so you'd have to be really assured that the templar you talked to was for it themselves or didn't care.
I mean, it doesn't seem that it's really changing.
Quote from: Ouroboros on September 27, 2013, 03:56:00 PMOddly enough, what I get from those numbers is that there's a lot less hate towards Southern Templars from the player population. It makes one wonder why that is.
It's probably that Tuluki templars tangle with PC magickers more so than Allanaki templars.
Quote from: janeshephard on September 28, 2013, 12:34:01 PM
Quote from: hyzhenhok on September 28, 2013, 12:29:12 PM
Instead they become loyal servants of X leader PC, and of course nobody outside of X leader has any real chance of hiring them to do something cool. And why would X leader ever risk trying to hire someone outside of their House for risky, potentially embarrassing jobs?
I would hire people outside my House to do stuff so it doesn't lead back to me.
You have to hire someone else to hire outside the House so it doesn't get back to you. It boils down to PC leaders generally trusting the PC that they've had in their House for 5 IC years rather than some outside PC.
Quote from: HavokBlue on September 30, 2013, 01:32:48 AM
It always bothers me when Templars in either city accuse petty criminals of treason or "crimes against the Highlord himself!"
That poor common peasant you don't give a shit about stole something you don't give a shit about from some other poor common peasant you don't give a shit about. Better call for air support.
They're not supposed to. Specifically, Templars aren't supposed to go after every petty crime and make a huge deal out of it. I haven't seen this in the game at all.
In Tuluk, though, I think some criminals need to be made an example of or no one is going to bother registering. That was my point.
I've already seen people completely ignore racism. I've seen players accuse others of "hate" when they act racist (yeah I know!). I've seen players completely ignore southrons showing up. Unless these attitudes are reinforced at a higher level, players will ignore documentation. Utilization of registration will remain low until it becomes in the players interest.
Quote from: janeshephard on September 30, 2013, 06:42:39 AM
Quote from: HavokBlue on September 30, 2013, 01:32:48 AM
It always bothers me when Templars in either city accuse petty criminals of treason or "crimes against the Highlord himself!"
That poor common peasant you don't give a shit about stole something you don't give a shit about from some other poor common peasant you don't give a shit about. Better call for air support.
They're not supposed to. Specifically, Templars aren't supposed to go after every petty crime and make a huge deal out of it. I haven't seen this in the game at all.
In Tuluk, though, I think some criminals need to be made an example of or no one is going to bother registering. That was my point.
I've already seen people completely ignore racism. I've seen players accuse others of "hate" when they act racist (yeah I know!). I've seen players completely ignore southrons showing up. Unless these attitudes are reinforced at a higher level, players will ignore documentation. Utilization of registration will remain low until it becomes in the players interest.
What you've seen, isn't necessarily what's going on. If you have a complaint against a player, file a player complaint. Here's an idea of what's going on:
You see:
Talia sits at the bar in Tuluk, showing off her citizen inks. Southerner without a Byn cloak, Salarr epaullettes, Fist Eclipse, or Kadian cape, shows up and sits down.
You see Talia look at the guy, nod an acknowledgement of his existence, and take a sip from her cup.
What's going on that you don't see:
Talia thinks, "Muthafucka southerner has the unmitigated gall to show up in OUR city after HIS people tried to war with us? Who the fuck does he think he is?"
Talia contacts her boss, Chosen Lady Malika, who is best pals with Faithful Lord Negean, head of the current batch of Legionirres.
Three minutes later, Amos, the Legionairre private in Negean's crew, shows up, lowering the hood of his tabard, sits down at the bar, and he and Talia start having a mundane conversation about nothing of significance.
Amos looks at Southerner - and emotes that he's keeping an eye on Southerner throughout the conversation. Talia continues to behave as though nothing unusual was going on.
But she's thinking "One move, buster, and you're disappeared."
To all observing, Talia is generally ignoring the fact that a filthy scum southerner is in the bar.
She is most certainly not ignoring him - and in fact she has taken action to ensure that the southerner is made to feel unwelcome, and watched, and suspected - while appearing herself to be entirely oblivious to the events.
Yes, I'm aware of that Lizzie.
I'm not filing a player complaint.
I've never quite understood what the point of subtlety concerning matters everyone would be in full agreement over is, anyway. That said, RP on, I suppose.
Quote from: Knight of Knives on September 30, 2013, 02:56:11 AM
I'm just curious- as to the outrage over not being able to kill a templar...
Has anyone ever bought a contract for a Faithful to be murdered, from another Faithful? The way the system currently stands, you -still- have to go through the Faithful to order a hit on one, so you'd have to be really assured that the templar you talked to was for it themselves or didn't care.
I mean, it doesn't seem that it's really changing.
It's safe to say it has never happened.
Are Shadow Artists themselves legitimate targets for contracts? If so, how would that be handled? If not, do you try to maintain secrecy or does the templar outright inform the person why the contract they want is no good?
Quote from: hyzhenhok on September 30, 2013, 10:44:54 AM
Are Shadow Artists themselves legitimate targets for contracts? If so, how would that be handled? If not, do you try to maintain secrecy or does the templar outright inform the person why the contract they want is no good?
I've never seen why not. Targeting a tool is often something that has been done in the past if the tool is a visible extension of a patron. However, hopefully this system can develop towards tactics that are more interesting. Hire an artist to break in and scare the artist ("you should really THINK about where your loyalties lie"). If they leave the patron, they may go elsewhere...right? Hire an artist to beat them up, if they can. ("You have made a terrible mistake working for this person. Think on your sins.") Yes, killing them is possible, but leaving someone alive can create interesting roleplay.
Consider the beat-up artist. They may well know who DID it (they see the sdesc/desc) but they know the artist has NOTHING to do with wanting to do it. They are just a tool, too. Retaliation against the tool MIGHT be silly. Should they tell their patron? Patron says "okay, I think this is who hired them, let's go after another one of THEIR tools once you recover," or "that artist doesn't seem to be a partisan of the target I think hired you for this, so leave them alone, they have nothing to do with it," or maybe the partisan just avoids telling the patron and quits because the threat works.
For those concerned about not being able to take out an assassination contract on a templar, going outside the system is always an option. This of course has it's own risks (but plotting against templars always do).
My biggest concern with this whole system is the, "you can't turn down a contract" concept.
This makes Shadow Artists, for better or worse, basically the "stealth unit" of the Legion.
Why not just make them Legion soldiers who specialize in stealthy things, and have it be an open secret that you can pay the templarate to have these soldiers complete "contracts" for you.
Fundamentally that is exactly what you are doing anyways. If the artists have to follow "orders" the same way Legion soldiers have to follow "orders" with no flexibility, they are basically just soldiers who don't live in the barracks.
I didn't see anything about artists being able to negotiate their own prices, or anything about the templarate hiring Shadow Artists themselves.
I see an issue with Templars "hiring" (ordering) Shadow Artists to take out their own enemies repeatedly at rock bottom prices. Why? Because they can, and the Shadow Artists have to take it, or they die.
Soldiers are soldiers, no matter what fancy name you put on them.
Quote from: Desertman on September 30, 2013, 11:40:21 AM
I didn't see anything about artists being able to negotiate their own prices, or anything about the templarate hiring Shadow Artists themselves.
I see an issue with Templars "hiring" (ordering) Shadow Artists to take out their own enemies repeatedly at rock bottom prices. Why? Because they can, and the Shadow Artists have to take it, or they die.
Can Brokers set their own contracts? This is now concerning. Much in the "you killed an NPC. Your task now is to kill a specific southern Templat or you are never allowed back into the Ivory on pain of death"
Quote from: Nyr on September 30, 2013, 11:33:28 AM
but leaving someone alive can create interesting roleplay.
Yeah... definitely very situational, but PC authority figures/fixtures of power/established badasses will probably feel more comfortable doing this than someone without many allies/someone trying really really hard to be sneaky.
Quote from: Desertman on September 30, 2013, 11:40:21 AM
My biggest concern with this whole system is the, "you can't turn down a contract" concept.
I think that's a pretty valid concern that's largely contingent on how the shadow brokers handle their business, which will probably be monitored pretty closely at the beginning, and hopefully redirected if stupid shit starts happening.
Quote from: Desertman on September 30, 2013, 11:40:21 AM
I see an issue with Templars "hiring" (ordering) Shadow Artists to take out their own enemies repeatedly at rock bottom prices. Why? Because they can, and the Shadow Artists have to take it, or they die.
Yeah, heh, this seems like an inevitability, kinda. But you know, I would almost rather a templar hire some dude to try to whack my dude or fuck with him than bringing him into a locked room for "talk" and then "order soldiers kill marsellus." I've been guilty of the latter more than once, but it would have been way cooler for me playing as Marsellus Wallace, to, you know, send out some goons like Jules and Vincent to do the light work. If this is a step in the direction away from locked room soldier kills, cool. There are more graceful and creative ways to skin those cats and degenerate criminal scum.
Hopefully, the brokers and overseeing staff will exercise good judgment when dealing with SAs who hesitate to accept contracts. Sending SAs on suicide missions (political, personal, unfairly dangerous) because a templar or the hiring dude is reckless/irresponsible/blind to facts seems like it would be full of suck.
Quote from: X-D on September 29, 2013, 03:28:20 PM
That alone would stop me from considering such a thing.
Who knows what the Templars agenda is...what better way to get rid of a problem give them "An offer they cannot refuse".
This is how I feel too. If contracts are mandatory, there's just too much risk involved, considering that an artist is possibly risking their own life. And when a character becomes so accomplished they're respected for their skill (enough to pull off difficult jobs), money is usually of no consequence and not much of a reward enough to outweigh the risk. Power and influence are the currency of Zalanthas, not coins. Then even if there were some way to offer power and influence to shadow artists for high profile jobs, I'm still not sure that'd be enough. Taking away someone's option to decline a job kind of makes the shadow artists slaves to the templarate. There is also nothing stopping a templar from leaning on a shadow artist, making veiled threats in order to try to influence them to take a job, but I don't think that should be the case with every contract.
Quote from: Riev on September 30, 2013, 12:01:54 PM
Quote from: Desertman on September 30, 2013, 11:40:21 AM
I didn't see anything about artists being able to negotiate their own prices, or anything about the templarate hiring Shadow Artists themselves.
I see an issue with Templars "hiring" (ordering) Shadow Artists to take out their own enemies repeatedly at rock bottom prices. Why? Because they can, and the Shadow Artists have to take it, or they die.
Can Brokers set their own contracts? This is now concerning. Much in the "you killed an NPC. Your task now is to kill a specific southern Templat or you are never allowed back into the Ivory on pain of death"
And get forcestored in the process.
Quote from: Desertman on September 30, 2013, 11:40:21 AM
My biggest concern with this whole system is the, "you can't turn down a contract" concept.
This makes Shadow Artists, for better or worse, basically the "stealth unit" of the Legion.
We're looking at some ways to reduce this necessity, but the idea behind "you can't turn down a contract" is more to ensure the OOC and IC security of such a system's existence. The more people that know about a contract, the more likely that information about it will leak out. If you have to take a contract given to you, then you are encouraged to actually do the contract. The ritualized aspect of the contract system might make it so that a contract can be turned down without learning the intricate details of the specific contract, but if you want to opt out of doing this, your opportunity to opt out is generally
before you get inked and
after you decide you are out of the game of being a shadow artist.
QuoteWhy not just make them Legion soldiers who specialize in stealthy things, and have it be an open secret that you can pay the templarate to have these soldiers complete "contracts" for you.
Because soldiers have crim-code immunity and thus would have no challenge. Next on the agenda IS the work on Legion soldiers and what exactly they have to do, but this isn't an area that should be mixed up.
QuoteFundamentally that is exactly what you are doing anyways. If the artists have to follow "orders" the same way Legion soldiers have to follow "orders" with no flexibility, they are basically just soldiers who don't live in the barracks.
Basically soldiers that don't ever have to kill anyone, never have to attend training, never have to wear a uniform, and never have to work directly for anyone, instead getting contract work through the templarate anonymously. The only caveat is that when they decide to be an artist, they're all in, and actually must BE an artist and DO that work. Just because something is mandated doesn't mean they're exactly the same as a soldier!
QuoteI didn't see anything about artists being able to negotiate their own prices, or anything about the templarate hiring Shadow Artists themselves.
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.
QuoteI see an issue with Templars "hiring" (ordering) Shadow Artists to take out their own enemies repeatedly at rock bottom prices. Why? Because they can, and the Shadow Artists have to take it, or they die.
To the former point, no. Templars going
repeatedly on the warpath to kill all opposition are obviously abusing the system and utilizing the most extreme ends of it. To the latter, it hasn't been specified what the consequences are for refusal and that is what we're working on.
Quote from: Riev on September 30, 2013, 12:01:54 PM
Can Brokers set their own contracts? This is now concerning. Much in the "you killed an NPC. Your task now is to kill a specific southern Templat or you are never allowed back into the Ivory on pain of death"
No, Faithful Lord Amos can't talk to himself in a private room, set his own price, and select his own artist and cut out the greater templarate from his own personal stash of coin. He'll have to talk to one of his PC templar buddies (or failing that, staff via a request).
I agree with Desertman above re: shadow artists becoming effectively the "stealth arm" of the legion under this system. I get that templars (or at least, the templarate) should have Ultimate Power in the city, but I don't know if that extends to placing every single tool for wielding power/influence (soldiers, crim code, and now criminal activity) directly in their hands.
It seems like we're holding these concepts true overall in Tuluk:
- Templars, by and large, will respect and uphold the decisions of other templars at least when it comes to shadow artist contracts,
- Templars place politics and their own ambitions secondary to the city's interests/traditions, even to their own detriment,
- Templars will be exerting direct, overt influence over criminal elements much moreso than happens in Allanak
Am I wrong getting this impression? It just seems like there's a lot more assumptions of rules being followed and people getting along in the Tuluki templarate than in Allanak, which is pretty much assumed to be cutthroat and ruled by whichever templar has bigger guns. It seems like by trying to force things in Tuluk to all be controlled by templars, who are expected to act more nicely, we're losing some interesting subtlty in the system (u see wat I did thar?)
Quote from: HavokBlue on September 29, 2013, 07:40:42 PM
i bet you're that guy who puts 3000 coin bounties on pickpockets for stealing your dagger
Under the new system I could have the dagger stolen back, and leave a 'message' for the person who stole from me.
My point earlier is utilization of this system will remain low unless there's IC consequences for ignoring it. The consequences ought to be serious.
God I hate it when Templars are in charge.
Quote from: Jherlen on September 30, 2013, 12:33:16 PM
I agree with Desertman above re: shadow artists becoming effectively the "stealth arm" of the legion under this system. I get that templars (or at least, the templarate) should have Ultimate Power in the city, but I don't know if that extends to placing every single tool for wielding power/influence (soldiers, crim code, and now criminal activity) directly in their hands.
It seems like we're holding these concepts true overall in Tuluk:
- Templars, by and large, will respect and uphold the decisions of other templars at least when it comes to shadow artist contracts,
- Templars place politics and their own ambitions secondary to the city's interests/traditions, even to their own detriment,
- Templars will be exerting direct, overt influence over criminal elements much moreso than happens in Allanak
Am I wrong getting this impression?
Templars will follow tradition. Nobles will follow tradition. If they don't Tuluki populace will stop as well since they don't have role models.
EDIT:
There's something much greater at stake than the Templar's ambition when a contract is messed with.
If I understand correctly a non-human shadow artist will have great difficulty in achieving the rank of master. I think this point should be mentioned in the docs so that players can have the knowledge before they create a PC.
Also an elven tribe can serve as a patron. Where does the tribe fit into the social hierarchy?
Could a merchant house approach the tribe about getting rid of someone? Or perhaps a noble house use the tribe to arrange the contract?
Do I understand correctly that contracts between a patron and a partisan are not really double blind?
Is there anyway a patron can refuse to let the Templarate use his partisan if the partisan is journeyman or lower? Otherwise the investment made by the patron is put in great risk and without any reward to the one who trained the artist.
Given that two artists are equally talented, how does system ensure that the Templarate will distribute contracts equally?
Quote from: Nyr on September 30, 2013, 11:33:28 AMYes, killing them is possible, but leaving someone alive can create interesting roleplay.
Just earned my much-coveted sig spot, big guy.
Quote from: Ouroboros on September 30, 2013, 02:06:43 PM
Quote from: Nyr on September 30, 2013, 11:33:28 AMYes, killing them is possible, but leaving someone alive can create interesting roleplay.
Just earned my much-coveted sig spot, big guy.
Maybe we should change the tagline to Betrayal, Corruption and interesting roleplay.
Quote from: ShaLeah on September 30, 2013, 02:08:51 PM
Quote from: Ouroboros on September 30, 2013, 02:06:43 PM
Quote from: Nyr on September 30, 2013, 11:33:28 AMYes, killing them is possible, but leaving someone alive can create interesting roleplay.
Just earned my much-coveted sig spot, big guy.
Maybe we should change the tagline to Betrayal, Corruption and interesting roleplay.
Armageddon:
Murder Interesting roleplay, Corruption (to an extent but not when defying Traditions), and Betrayal
Quote from: Norcal on September 30, 2013, 01:57:59 PM
If I understand correctly a non-human shadow artist will have great difficulty in achieving the rank of master. I think this point should be mentioned in the docs so that players can have the knowledge before they create a PC.
Also an elven tribe can serve as a patron. Where does the tribe fit into the social hierarchy?
Elven tribes are like merchant houses.
Wait...no, I'm thinking of indie human groups with actual "people" in them.
Elven tribes are elven tribes. They do not have a place on the social ranking system except as citizen commoners and possibly whatever rank they can get by being a bard or a shadow artist. Even then, it would be exceptionally rare for an elf that is actively part of a tribe to ever rise to the ranks of bard-dom and shadow artistry that require loyalty to a different power than their tribe. At the level of Master (and the level of "Bard"), the tribe becomes "the city's interests" or "Rusarla". I'd go so far as to say elves would be the most prone to give this system lip service and then the finger at the same time, using it when it suits them and illegally doing whatever they want when they can get away with it, because they're elves.
QuoteCould a merchant house approach the tribe about getting rid of someone? Or perhaps a noble house use the tribe to arrange the contract?
Find out IC, and suffer the consequences/reap the benefits in that way.
QuoteDo I understand correctly that contracts between a patron and a partisan are not really double blind?
Patron still goes to the templar, templar still gives the task to the partisan artist, but since the patron and partisan can talk about the job, it may as well not be double blind except "on paper."
QuoteIs there anyway a patron can refuse to let the Templarate use his partisan if the partisan is journeyman or lower? Otherwise the investment made by the patron is put in great risk and without any reward to the one who trained the artist.
I'll correct that for you: no, a patron can't refuse to let the
city use his or her partisan. It's not about the templarate, it's about having artists available to do work for the city, whatever that work may be. Locking away partisan artists into exclusive relationships with their patrons = the antithesis of what partisan/patronage relationships SHOULD be in general. We haven't backed that up over the years that well, and this begins the process of making that more clear. Partisan/patronage relationships are about give and take. There are different kinds of these sorts of relationships, but two of them are
Bardic partisans -- sure, you can keep them exclusively if you both want to, but once they hit the rank of Bard, they won't be staying on as your permanent partisan anymore (except in very rare exceptions for one Circle, find out in-Circle). After that point they're doing work on behalf of the Circles, and their work from you turns into temp contracts.
Artist partisans -- sure, you can keep them as your partisan artist and you can use them for your own jobs, but the city-state needs them more than you do, so you'll be forced to rent their services out anonymously (though never against your own organization unless they are a Master).
QuoteGiven that two artists are equally talented, how does system ensure that the Templarate will distribute contracts equally?
Using their player noggins. If there's two equally talented artists, then flip a coin and give one to one guy and then the next one requiring an artist to the other gal. Or maybe whichever one is online when the templar is going through the artist rolls.
What exactly is a patron's incentive to hire a thief?
If they know they must go to the templarate for anything shady, why would they feed, clothe, and pay to have their own thief, who can't even tell them about jobs they've pulled?
If I play a thief of some sort, do I then have to sit around in bars and barracks until a templar gets on and can meet with me to tell me about a job?
If I play a patron, and I have (for some reason) employed a person perfect for a job, do I then have to wait around to find a templar, explain the job, haggle over prices, wait for the templar to meet with your employee, just for something simple?
It has always been possible for people to go to the templarate to broker jobs, but now it's required. I guess I'm just trying to see how adding more restrictions on a role would make it more fun.
Quote from: Nyr on September 30, 2013, 12:15:33 PM
We're looking at some ways to reduce this necessity, but the idea behind "you can't turn down a contract" is more to ensure the OOC and IC security of such a system's existence. The more people that know about a contract, the more likely that information about it will leak out. If you have to take a contract given to you, then you are encouraged to actually do the contract. The ritualized aspect of the contract system might make it so that a contract can be turned down without learning the intricate details of the specific contract, but if you want to opt out of doing this, your opportunity to opt out is generally before you get inked and after you decide you are out of the game of being a shadow artist.
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.
Quote from: Nyr on September 30, 2013, 12:15:33 PM
Because soldiers have crim-code immunity and thus would have no challenge. Next on the agenda IS the work on Legion soldiers and what exactly they have to do, but this isn't an area that should be mixed up.
That makes sense, and I'm glad that clan is getting some love. It needs it.
Quote from: Nyr on September 30, 2013, 12:15:33 PM
Basically soldiers that don't ever have to kill anyone, never have to attend training, never have to wear a uniform, and never have to work directly for anyone, instead getting contract work through the templarate anonymously. The only caveat is that when they decide to be an artist, they're all in, and actually must BE an artist and DO that work. Just because something is mandated doesn't mean they're exactly the same as a soldier!
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.
Quote from: Nyr on September 30, 2013, 12:15:33 PM
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.
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.
Quote from: Nyr on September 30, 2013, 12:15:33 PM
To the former point, no. Templars going repeatedly on the warpath to kill all opposition are obviously abusing the system and utilizing the most extreme ends of it. To the latter, it hasn't been specified what the consequences are for refusal and that is what we're working on.
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.
Quote from: Nyr on September 30, 2013, 12:15:33 PM
No, Faithful Lord Amos can't talk to himself in a private room, set his own price, and select his own artist and cut out the greater templarate from his own personal stash of coin. He'll have to talk to one of his PC templar buddies (or failing that, staff via a request).
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.
Quote from: Jherlen on September 30, 2013, 02:23:50 PM
Quote from: ShaLeah on September 30, 2013, 02:08:51 PM
Quote from: Ouroboros on September 30, 2013, 02:06:43 PM
Quote from: Nyr on September 30, 2013, 11:33:28 AMYes, killing them is possible, but leaving someone alive can create interesting roleplay.
Just earned my much-coveted sig spot, big guy.
Maybe we should change the tagline to Betrayal, Corruption and interesting roleplay.
Armageddon: Murder Interesting roleplay, Corruption (to an extent but not when defying Traditions), and Betrayal
I could easily go the other way on it.
Armageddon: Murder*, Corruption**, Betrayal***
*except when I'm being forced to murder someone when I chose to be in a role that may occasionally have to murder people!
**except when templars are in control of the system, because it should be pristine!
***except when there's a .01% chance that I'll have to betray someone I don't want to betray--in order to kill them because I chose to be an artist that may occasionally have to murder people!;)
But anyway, no, I'm not saying don't murder people with this thing. I'm saying that everyone is focused on murdering people with this thing when it is only 1/3 of the things you can do with it. 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. We don't generally allow completely open-ended corruption across the board in all areas of the game in areas where it impacts playability for other players...and again, it's easier to loosen restrictions with guidelines than it is to tighten restrictions from guidelines.
Quote from: bricklayer on September 30, 2013, 02:44:18 PM
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.
QuoteIf they know they must go to the templarate for anything shady, why would they feed, clothe, and pay to have their own thief, who can't even tell them about jobs they've pulled?
Went over this before earlier in the thread with regard to all artists. For starters, partisan relationships do not require providing food, clothing, shelter, or even pay. In this particular case, it could be that the patron offers the potential for training in exchange for the ability to use that particular artist in jobs. Why would they do it? Because they'd have the ability to go over stuff directly with them for jobs and also get a cut of earnings from the artist if that's part of the agreement.
QuoteIf I play a thief of some sort, do I then have to sit around in bars and barracks until a templar gets on and can meet with me to tell me about a job?
If you play a registered shadow artist and want to work on contract work, yes. You may feel free to skirt the law and break and enter at your own peril (or steal stuff directly from people) like every other thief in Allanak does without a licensed system; you can then find out IC whether punishment for being caught doing so is any worse than in Allanak. Hopefully you're not just interested in codedly stealing stuff and codedly breaking and entering, and are instead also interested in the more tricky aspects of the other sorts of work you can get into (again, all without killing people). Things that require RP and even coordination with staff if you so choose...
QuoteIf I play a patron, and I have (for some reason) employed a person perfect for a job, do I then have to wait around to find a templar, explain the job, haggle over prices, wait for the templar to meet with your employee, just for something simple?
Yes, because the templarate wants a cut of your contract. Mentioned before, but we're looking into alternatives for this while we're discussing it staff-side (
maybe allowing after-the-fact notification for
some work). However, let's say you've found the perfect person to kill someone else. What if you don't have the clout to do it and what if the fee is higher than you can pay? You're skirting the whole system. At worst, it means adding a bit of delay between your plan's start and its eventual execution by your artist.
QuoteIt has always been possible for people to go to the templarate to broker jobs, but now it's required. I guess I'm just trying to see how adding more restrictions on a role would make it more fun.
For starters, you'd get more work. It also makes it easier for staff to freely pass on contracts via animation to templars, and then have the PC templars forward work along to PCs...thereby driving more plots. (We could do that before, but with a structured system, it makes it easier to initiate the process for us.) As mentioned before, we're not done with things in Tuluk, and some of those things could use some artist participation.
Quote from: Nyr on September 30, 2013, 02:50:54 PM
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.
Quote from: Desertman on September 30, 2013, 02:46:03 PM
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).
Quote
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.
Quote
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).
Quote
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.
Quote
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.
Quote from: Nyr on September 30, 2013, 03:09:47 PM
Quote from: bricklayer on September 30, 2013, 02:44:18 PM
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.
Quote from: bricklayer on September 30, 2013, 03:56:04 PM
Quote from: Nyr on September 30, 2013, 03:09:47 PM
Quote from: bricklayer on September 30, 2013, 02:44:18 PM
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.
Quote from: Nyr on September 30, 2013, 12:15:33 PM
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.
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.
Quote from: williamson on September 30, 2013, 04:18:43 PM
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.
QuoteBard 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.
QuoteShadow 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.
QuoteTemplar 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.
QuoteMerchant 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.
QuoteTo 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.
Quote from: Quirk on September 30, 2013, 04:54:39 PM
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.
QuoteNote 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).
QuoteThe shadow artist is put on a sucide mission:
Shadow artists shouldn't be put on suicide missions.
Quote from: Nyr on September 30, 2013, 03:51:36 PM
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.
Quote from: Nyr on September 30, 2013, 03:51:36 PM
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.
Quote from: Nyr on September 30, 2013, 03:51:36 PM
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...
Quote from: Nyr on September 30, 2013, 03:51:36 PM
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.
Quote from: Quirk on September 30, 2013, 04:54:39 PM
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.
Quote from: Desertman on September 30, 2013, 05:03:40 PM
Quote from: Nyr on September 30, 2013, 03:51:36 PM
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.
Quote
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.
Quote
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.
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.
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?
Quote from: MeTekillot on September 30, 2013, 08:13:50 PM
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.
Quote from: Sayyadina on September 30, 2013, 09:12:02 PM
Quote from: MeTekillot on September 30, 2013, 08:13:50 PM
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.
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.
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.
Quote from: Jherlen on September 30, 2013, 10:23:45 PM
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.
Quote from: Lizzie on September 30, 2013, 09:28:53 PM
Quote from: Sayyadina on September 30, 2013, 09:12:02 PM
Quote from: MeTekillot on September 30, 2013, 08:13:50 PM
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 (http://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,46260.msg779632.html#msg779632)?
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...
Quote from: hyzhenhok on September 30, 2013, 10:21:22 PM
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?
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 ;)
Quote from: Riev on September 30, 2013, 11:44:38 PMAnd 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.
Quote from: hyzhenhok on September 30, 2013, 10:21:22 PMthis 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.
Quote from: hyzhenhok on September 30, 2013, 10:27:13 PMSome 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.
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.
Quote from: Qzzrbl on October 01, 2013, 01:20:55 AM
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?
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.)
My problem with the can't say no part has nothing to do with 100% freedom or any freedom. It is the knowledge that there is no reason at all to think the player of the templar doing the promoting or matching jobs has anyind of clue at all as to what they are doing... in fact...my past experience has been that thwy do not...having played a successful thief...assassin or any class for that.matter is not something you need to get a templar role
I may have said this before, but I just think this is all a definite step in the right direction for Tuluk. The iron claw of tyranny wrapped in a silk glove. It's hard to think of Tuluk as nice and cuddly when everyone has access to bad guys willing to send any message or even kill over slights real or imagined. Keeps the populace focused on worrying about each other, and not thinking dangerous thoughts about things the Sun King doesn't want them to.
Would make Tuluk scarier than Allanak in some ways, because at least in Allanak you know which ass to kiss and which to kick.
Quote from: X-D on October 01, 2013, 03:25:38 AM
My problem with the can't say no part has nothing to do with 100% freedom or any freedom. It is the knowledge that there is no reason at all to think the player of the templar doing the promoting or matching jobs has anyind of clue at all as to what they are doing... in fact...my past experience has been that thwy do not...having played a successful thief...assassin or any class for that.matter is not something you need to get a templar role
Then don't submit your characters to that? Be a criminal killer-for-hire or freelance thief and not a Shadow Artist? If the Templars are unknowing as you say, you might be able to get away with it! ;)
What a horrible reply. did you even read or understand it before quoting then replying that nonsense? I said nothing about the templar being clueless. Making your sugestion just silly. i am commenting on the very real fact that there is no reason why the player behind it should have a clue.
NOW...if the docs for shadow artist included at some point the artist at least having the imput to be able to suggest to the templar that this is not a task they ate able to complete...and documented that the templat should be considering the completion more important then the artst saying no. then i am all good...i do not care if the player of the artist overestimates thier skills...that is on them... but you would be amazed how.many times in the past i have seen templars send people on suicide missions and they honestly expected it to be completed simply because the PLAYER did not know any better.
Oh...that last bit applies to pretty much any leader...but least in other clans you have recourse...quit...refuse...go over head.
Generally the winking face means it's a joke, dude.
Although the part about if you don't like the system, work outside it still stands. Kudos to those who try it too.
Sorry...no winking face on my phone...or.missed it. And it is not so much.not liking the system...i like the idea just fine...just looking for loopholes or other fixes. players knowing or not knowing how another guild works should not be something that decides the ic fate of another. Yet that is just what is being depended on. sure...i have run into templars played by people that have a great understanding on each class and i have also see ones who i am sure the player only had merchants before hand. So...i believe that the shadow artist player should have some recourse...be it ic or ooc (staff) and that should be documented.
Also...i have some concerns about how pricing to be regulated..
somebody feels like posting or linking where that may have been covered?
Just like you don't know what pricing structures are there right now, you probably won't know what pricing structures are there in the future. It's probably a good thing you didn't know what it was until now.
Quote from: Sayyadina on September 30, 2013, 11:41:07 PM
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?
Probably not as you've suggested here. What we are probably planning to do is to move the system from one in which the artist has no power to one in which the artist has some small amount of say, and any refusal could directly affect their status or even their remaining an artist, depending on reasons for refusal. We'll re-open this for discussion once the revised documentation is up.