Was directed to this little "gem" by a helper:

Quote from: Adhira on December 11, 2007, 06:43:35 PM
A gem gives a magicker permission to live in Allanak, without it they are killed.

Magickers are not the same level as your average commoner, they are set apart by their gem. They are marked in this way as citizens, servants an magickers of the state of Allanak.  The statement that gemmed are granted the right to live in Allanak is correct. It is only by the benevolence of the Highlord that they are tolerated to live. Every other person, be the dwarf, human or elf does not need to have this granted.

Are they slaves of the city state? No. They do not belong to the Templarate any more than any other person within Naks walls. But they are not the same as every other commoner. Legally they are not slaves, but as we all know, the law doesn't really apply in Zalanthas.

Once upon a time gemmed were considered Oash's domain, because near all of them worked for Oash, this was the playerbases assumptions based on what they saw IC.  People assumed if they played a gemmed, they'd be working for Oash.  If people are perceiving gemmed to be little more than Templars slaves in game it's more likely a reaction to what they are observing ICly.

To change that perception players of both the gemmed and the Templarate need to make an effort not to perpetuate that ICly. If you're a Templar walking around with a cadre of magickers, if you're a magicker who goes running to a Templar for work instead of working alone, going to an Oashi, finding some other employment, you're just reinforcing the belief.

I'm not sure if this was meant to be a recruitment post to get people to play gemmed, or to try and get gemmers to be something other than Templarate puppets. In the end most everyone is right. Gemmed are not slaves, they are different from your average commoner, they can have lives outside of being puppets of Templar/Noble House/Whatever.  

Thought it could serve as a friendly reminder that Gemmed aren't any more 'slaves' of the Templarate/nobles than other common citizen.
I would also think that this goes double for gemmed citizens who are aligned with other houses or powerful social groups.

PS: The whole old thread is a pretty good read on the subject as well.

Yes. Thank you. Good reminder.

While gemmed often do choose (emphasis on the choice there) to align themselves with the templarate, or to seek actual employment with House Oash, it is not required to do so. A gemmer should be perfectly free to live his/her life as an indie, free of entanglement in magickal or political plots. I believe that one of the big reasons many players who want to play magickers will choose to play rogues rather than playing gemmed is because there is often so much pressure from the templarate to bend to this idea that gemmed are slaves. This attitude only serves to drives players out of the city.

I'm not certain of what provoked this post, but I'll add my own note to it ...

Gemmed may not be the legal slaves of the Templarate, but they can be called to His Templarate's service in time of need, just as with any other citizen. This is true. It's your patriotic duty, so get your butt over here, etc etc. As the Templars are the only ones who can invoke the power of the Gems, it can be implied that they do wield greater authority over the mages than they do other citizens. Point of view on the Templar's part.

Of course, where the law is concerned, it's as unreliable as you've said. Templars have the power to make up laws on the fly, sometimes to subvert other laws!

The problem here is that the templarate (and to a lesser extent, the militia) has the singular power within Allanak to make the city unpalatable to play in, for a large quantity of players. While the VNPC and NPC population of the city aren't going to be driven away by PC templars forcefully threatening and coercing PCs into service, PCs will. When I played in the AoD, we were highly conscious of balancing our power against individuals and organizations so that we did not drive players away.

Also, the foofaraw about "gemmed can be called to service in time of need just like any other citizen" is a smokescreen, IMO. Other citizens are never called into service the way gemmed are. I have never seen Amos the ranger threatened with his life if he doesn't immediately go to Red Storm to pick up spice for Lady Templar Gaga. But gemmed are threatened in this manner frequently.

A last point--overuse of the gemmed leads to underuse of mundane militia and other citizens. Magick should not be the magick solution to every problem the templarate has. It makes mundanes feel useless and hopeless. (Been there, done that, it sucks!) I would like to encourage every player to not look to magick first for solutions, as well as not making every plot center around acquiring leet magick equipment or completing some fancy ritual. There's lots of mundane stuff to be done and most of it should be accomplishable by mundane means.

I believe that realistically, most gemmed citizens are NOT Oashis or templar pets, even if most gemmed PCs are (but I don't believe that is often the case).

The perception of (non-Oash) gemmed all being slaves is partly an IC one.  It's of great benefit for the templarate to perpetuate that idea.  It both placates the mundane population as well as helps keep the gemmed in line.

It is far from unreasonable for templars to treat gemmed more harshly than ungemmed.  Due to their rarity/usefulness, it seems logical that templars would be quicker to call upon their services over those of a mundane.  Due to their power/danger, it seems logical that they should be punished more quickly and severely than a mundane.

That said, gemmed are not true slaves.  A templar may call on them at any time to perform services, but they should expect to be compensated for it.  As said, the same is largely true for non-gemmed as well.  Likewise, it would be unreasonable for a templar to forbid a gemmed to travel or otherwise restrict their activities beyond the normal citizen, unless perhaps they were offered some continual compensation (read: employment).


I guess in short I disagree with:

Quote from: Weregortok on January 04, 2010, 11:52:18 AMThought it could serve as a friendly reminder that Gemmed aren't any more 'slaves' of the Templarate/nobles than other common citizen.

I don't think that's what Adhira's post says.  They are more slaves than the common citizen, but they are less slaves than actual slaves.

Quote from: Gimfalisette on January 04, 2010, 12:29:42 PMAlso, the foofaraw about "gemmed can be called to service in time of need just like any other citizen" is a smokescreen, IMO. Other citizens are never called into service the way gemmed are. I have never seen Amos the ranger threatened with his life if he doesn't immediately go to Red Storm to pick up spice for Lady Templar Gaga. But gemmed are threatened in this manner frequently.

I've seen it.  But, you're right, the gemmed have that happen much more.

[/quote]A last point--overuse of the gemmed leads to underuse of mundane militia and other citizens. Magick should not be the magick solution to every problem the templarate has. It makes mundanes feel useless and hopeless. (Been there, done that, it sucks!) I would like to encourage every player to not look to magick first for solutions, as well as not making every plot center around acquiring leet magick equipment or completing some fancy ritual. There's lots of mundane stuff to be done and most of it should be accomplishable by mundane means.
[/quote]
Agreed.  It's a balancing act, though.  Gemmers are PCs too!  I believe that every templar should have a gemmer pet, but never more than two (and calling on both at the same time should be rare).  While groups of gemmed can easily make mundanes redundant, just one will still leave gaps that the soldiers can fill.

Quote from: Marauder Moe on January 04, 2010, 12:32:42 PM
Due to their rarity/usefulness, it seems logical that templars would be quicker to call upon their services over those of a mundane.

This, I just have to emphasize again, I utterly disagree with. When templars overuse magickers, they underuse mundanes. For the most part, when templars are calling on gemmed to do stuff, they are assigning tasks that can definitely be done by mundanes; but the templar is simply seeking what they consider to be an easier/faster solution. I cannot state how much I hated and resented, as an AoD Sergeant, always hearing, "Oh yeah there's this mission but I'm gonna have the gemmed do it." Meanwhile the very capable group of soldiers I had built sat on our asses and had little to do but train, drink at the Gaj, and chase the occasional criminal. We wanted to be the ones to go scouting, go kill something, go do anything, but we were rarely allowed to do so--because some gemmer could do it quicker/easier in the templar's mind.

The few thousand templars who work for Tek are not all calling on gemmed constantly to do their work. They are calling on soldiers, they are using their connections with the nobility, they are hiring the Byn, they are working under the table with the Guild, they are coordinating with the GMHs. They are using a full set of resources instead of narrowly focusing on the gemmed as the solution to every problem. I would strongly urge players of templars to be creative when thinking about how to get things done; when only the gemmed get used (and constantly), then one set of players is burned out while another grows resentful. Allanak is so much more fun when everyone gets something to do.

Playing ARM is not about winning, after all; especially as a leader, it's about spreading the fun around so everyone gets some. Yes, you might like to see Malik the elf dead, but relying on magick to do the job every time because it's a "winning" solution impoverishes the game.

Added: I don't think we really disagree, Moe. But I have to argue on the side of the mundanes, it's what I do Yes, gemmed need love too, but from what I see historically, they almost always get tasks to do. I want to see it balanced, is all.

When I said "mundane", I meant random unaffiliated Amos the ranger, not the militia.  You're right, the militia should be first and foremost.

EDIT: and it should be an appropriate task.  A templar shouldn't be grabbing a whiran just to retrieve spice for his buddy Lord Fale.

Rather than pointing out the usefulness of one over the other, in terms of mechanics, or their social positions in the City: I'd just like to say that the two aren't mutually exclusive. Why not use both? A good Templar that has an abundance of resources at his/her hands, when faced with a problem, isn't going to say, "I should put about 10% of my effort into dealing with this. Drov, it's just trying to destroy the Noble Quarters, after all." He or She is going to put an all out approach, in cases of emergency, ultizing all those resources that Gimfalisette mentioned, rather than just picking and choosing. That isn't to say that certain classes don't handle the situations better than others, but Armageddon is supposed to be realistic, in a sense, and in the real world sometimes the odds aren't stacked to your strong-points. One might think that an advantage of these two categories of individuals working together towards a common goal might assist (never resolve) in aleivating some tension between them.*

Point being that it solves the whole crisis of who should get the RP and who shouldn't in such situations. I remember one of my first characters having to worked with a Gemmed, and having my fingers shaking at the keyboard, and not because I was afraid of the gith, either.

Now to comment on the social position, I agree with Moe that the Gemmed are worse off than slaves. However, to use an old expression, slaves are kanks, and gemmed are kanks that can do pretty tricks. The Gemmed should always be treated with disdain, and the Gemmed and Commoner gap should never be closed, but if a Templar is ordering you to work along side a Gemmed, I suppose it depends on your character mentality as to what the reaction might be. In favor of the mundane class, they heavily outnumber the Gemmed, yes, but in both cases I'm in favor of the "There's always more where that came from" approach when it comes to Noble/Templarate views on the Commoner/Gemmed.


*Note: I don't want to live in a world where mundanes and Gemmed get along.

QuoteMagick

Magick is a mysterious and very rare power on Zalanthas, about which the general public knows very little, and generally fears and hates a great deal. While magickers are tolerated in some places, they are generally feared and distrusted by the vast majority of the population of Zalanthas. In many places, magickers are killed upon discovery, and even the rumor that one is a magicker can lead to one's death.

In Allanak, magickers are required to register their presence with the Templarate immediately, and to wear a marker of their status for the rest of their lives. (This marker is supposedly a black gem worn at the neck.) As such, registered magickers in Allanak have the same rights as do the mundane citizens of the city.

In Tuluk, fear and hatred of magick among the populace are widespread, in no small part due to the destruction of Old Tuluk by a magickal cataclysm. Known magickers of any sort are killed on sight. Any magickers who do attempt to live out their lives in Tuluk do so in secrecy, with a never-ending fear of being discovered and put to death.

FW, what are you implying?

Having the same rights doesn't mean equality. Haven't you learned anything from the sixties?

Any templar has the right to persuade, coerce, or bully any commoner, with or without gem, within the walls do do anything they see fit.  Consequences may come from that, depending on who they do it to.

As a more useful thought experiment, go ahead and list the rights that the average Allanaki citizen enjoys.

Quote from: Cavaticus on January 04, 2010, 01:10:43 PM
As a more useful thought experiment, go ahead and list the rights that the average Allanaki citizen enjoys.

They have the right - indeed, the privilege - to serve the Highlord's Will, whatever that may be. 

Quote from: Marauder Moe on January 04, 2010, 01:05:01 PM
FW, what are you implying?

That all citizens holds the same right, you know.. kinda like the documentation for the games says (don't fool yourself, there aren't any, but they do all have them same ones).

Quote from: Niamh on January 04, 2010, 01:09:38 PM
Any templar has the right to persuade, coerce, or bully any commoner, with or without gem, within the walls do do anything they see fit.  Consequences may come from that, depending on who they do it to.

I couldn't have said it better myself.

This thread is another example of one of those things that -can- and -should- be taken care of completely ICly rather than putting OOC pressure on players to fine tune their RP to whatever the apparent consensus may be. If someone seems totally out of line, just file a complaint or email the staff or something.

Quote from: Zoltan on January 04, 2010, 01:17:11 PM
This thread is another example of one of those things that -can- and -should- be taken care of completely ICly rather than putting OOC pressure on players to fine tune their RP to whatever the apparent consensus may be. If someone seems totally out of line, just file a complaint or email the staff or something.

I learned a lot about effectively playing a Tuluki bard in a way that doesn't OOCly piss off the majority of the playerbase via discussion on the GDB. (I got kudos from dedicated Nakki-playing bard haters.)

I learned a lot about effectively playing an AoD officer in a way that doesn't OOCly piss off the majority of the playerbase via discussion on the GDB. (I got kudos from players whose PCs I harassed and abused.)

I learned a lot about effectively playing a noble in a way that doesn't OOCly piss off the majority of the playerbase via discussion on the GDB. (Again, kudos involved.)

The GDB is an important vehicle for improving and adjusting our play. Players should always be willing to learn from what is talked about here, in order to make the game better for the entire playerbase. Just because a player has been granted a sponsored role doesn't mean that s/he should be unwilling to listen to and learn from criticism.

Also, many of the issues at hand are OOC issues.

I've also seen this issue arise as a more common and widespread IC misconception rather than anyone's specific roleplay so it's good to see reminders like this every so often.

Quote from: Zoltan on January 04, 2010, 01:17:11 PM
This thread is another example of one of those things that -can- and -should- be taken care of completely ICly rather than putting OOC pressure on players to fine tune their RP to whatever the apparent consensus may be. If someone seems totally out of line, just file a complaint or email the staff or something.

Documentation and staff comments are not "common consensus."

"Playing effectively" isn't the point of any role in Armageddon. I know, I know, many disagree. Reminding players of the game world, staff views and documentation is good. Insinuating someone is not doing the game justice because of including or not including whoever or whatever just doesn't sit well with me.

FW you will note that I agreed with the documentation and staff comments. What -I- (likely just me) perceive as OOC criticism for things that can be handled completely ICly is what bugs me.

I too garnered a buttload of kudos, heart-warming thumbs ups and man-tear-inducing account notes for my play in a sponsored role and other roles as well. I'm glad other people had fun. But if I worried about what everyone else thought about my play besides what staff have said and what's in the docs, well, things would have sucked. Actually... come to think of it, I -am- worrying about it otherwise I wouldn't be posting! 

I agree with you for the most part as well, but I don't believe the OP bringing up the position of the Gemmed in Allanak is "fine tuning" anyone's roleplay.
I, for one, use to actually thing the Gemmed -were- slaves to the Templarate, and this wasn't too long ago.  I've seen many instances IG where those outside Allanak believed just that.

PS - Many times "common consensus" can move beyond the scope of the documented game world, and even contricictory to it.  Reminders and discussions like that keep "common consensus" from becoming "the way things are" despite documentation.

All Allanaki citizens, gemmed or not, are "slaves" to the will of the Highlord (read: PC templars).

Gemmers just get ordered around more often because they're useful in specific ways.

And, People -from- outside nak maybe should believe it. Or maybe they should believe that gemmed are really animated petoch fruit around only to amuse the templars.

And even if the docs state what something really is, that does not always mean that the masses, commoners, people who cannot read or write, who are kept down as much as possible would know these things. There is indeed nothing wrong with somebody who has lived in allanak since birth thinking that gemmers are templars slaves or that the gems are how the highlord stops gemmers from exploding if sunlight hits them. Only Templars and nobles need know the truth.
AND, if a templar states that all gemmers are his/her slave...guess what, they are.

Myself, I took offense at the OP.

Well, not really offense, but the quote is from another thread and out of context.
Another reason I prefer thread res over new ones on the same matter.

Quote from: Zoltan on January 04, 2010, 02:22:49 PM
"Playing effectively" isn't the point of any role in Armageddon. I know, I know, many disagree. Reminding players of the game world, staff views and documentation is good. Insinuating someone is not doing the game justice because of including or not including whoever or whatever just doesn't sit well with me.

FW you will note that I agreed with the documentation and staff comments. What -I- (likely just me) perceive as OOC criticism for things that can be handled completely ICly is what bugs me.

I too garnered a buttload of kudos, heart-warming thumbs ups and man-tear-inducing account notes for my play in a sponsored role and other roles as well. I'm glad other people had fun. But if I worried about what everyone else thought about my play besides what staff have said and what's in the docs, well, things would have sucked. Actually... come to think of it, I -am- worrying about it otherwise I wouldn't be posting! 

I don't "worry" about what others think of my play--whether that means players or staff. (This is why I don't request my account notes.) I do, however, want to always be improving my play so that Armageddon is a better and better game.

What I meant to say about the kudos and all is--that prior to getting kudos for the roles I played, I also got some complaints for those roles and/or there was some critical discussion generated on the GDB. Upon receiving complaints and participating in discussion, I adjusted--after which I eventually got kudos. Ask jstorrie about my newbie crimes against barddom, I'm sure he'll be happy to recount

Yes, I believe that if those in sponsored leadership roles are not casting a wide net and involving a lot of players, then they are not using their roles to the full. The whole point of sponsored leadership roles is to involve other players--check it, that's in the docs.

OOC criticism is a necessary and important part of becoming a more mature and more contributing player. And when the solution to IC issues of all kinds often is to kill the offending party--well, I'd rather we discuss it OOCly first before I get PKed, or you do (that's general you), or someone else does. IC consequences are not and should not be the only means to learning and improving one's play.