Change To Contracts / Marks

Tesha

Oh, nevermind. What Silas and Antonius said.

Strata

The real underlying theme here is: There's many marks who just want in it for the honors line. And those people are now in this thread trying to protect that honors line from being deleted eventually when they continue to do what they've been doing as marks for years: nothing.

Saeva

As a player on the "not a mark" side, I know this change sort of puts us, the non-marks, at a disadvantage to getting the contract fulfilled... I'm still into it. I was only able to successfully hire once (and that turned sour in the end anyways) because the 4 or 5 veiled marks who you can rely on to get the job done consistently, don't want to deal with your hits. Whether it's because they are too busy with contracts they already have, or you aren't their pal. Which, honestly, made it seem less of a mark org to feeling like more of a buddy club.
It felt awkward asking an assassin to take a contract and then have them tell you they don't have time, then not knowing who to ask next.

Granted, I haven't felt any desire or need to hire on anyone in a long while, there were times before and I just thought to myself how much nicer it would be if I could just hire anonymously and not waste 2 or 3 RL days trying to get a hold of the marks that in the end, bail.

Sucks that the Ivory Mark now feels slighted in their RP. Maybe over time, they will develop something to correct this.
But as far as the Quisalis goes, I'm pretty interested to see how it goes.
This gives the less reputable marks a chance to step it up.

Arador

Yes because someone can only go mark for the reasons you do. News Flash dude: people have been going mark since long before I started playing for various reasons from gold, to improving combat skill to the xp bonus to RP development and so on. In fact I would go as far too say that the honours line is something the majority of marks do not care about or even want. 

The ivory mark especially does not fall under your limited personal view. As for the system, it is interesting but for ivory mark it is a complete ill fit. Hell, even being quisalis does not make you a mindless killing machine by default. 

Perhaps a way to configure your status such as only receiving from city mates or non enemies, only taking contracts on enemies or even what classes you specialise in hunting could add cool flavour to it.

Edit to clarify post is in response to @Strata

Jacen

There are very legitimate concerns in the thread, the most legitimate I see being that the mark doesn't know who hired them. That concern makes perfect sense for Targossas: a Targossian mark doesn't want to aid an Ashtani or Mhaldorian or Hashani in their plights. 

That being said, it shouldn't matter to the hirer who the contract was given to. Because of the new anonymity, the hirer is essentially paying an organization for a service.

I can understand why the Ivory Mark is upset at having their "Champion for the Weak" RP taken away, and I think that's a legitimate concern as well. What I don't understand is why the Targossians are the ones most upset about it... Isn't the benevolence of Ivory Mark just the kind of thing you swore off? You got all up in arms over not wanting a Knight program because that sort of honor doesn't belong in Targossas, but you want an honorable Mark program?

Xith

1.If you get hired on 100 times, I believe the route is probably to ISSUE ME I don't remember doing 100 bad things. Halp, halp, I'm being repressed.

2. Couple thoughts:

a) There currently are mark teamers, because after all they're infamous so generating cause on themselves is somewhat null. But certain targets are tough/elusive, so if you could REQUEST CHAMPION[S] FOR <target>, and the Champion would then choose how many and which teammates to add, each one fractionalizing/sharing their gold and experience gains?

This would provide a legal means to hire multiple marks for one contract. It does feel more Champion-y but I guess making it Ivory only could result in marks going ivory for that benefit.

b) Happy for the mark overhaul, but Quisalis and Ivory do need reskinning. If the above idea was put in, you could balance out the Ivory advantages by giving Assassins an experience bonus, so that even in individual contracts, the Ivory always yields less. But only Ivory could do team contracts?

c) WRITS. Is confusing, not sure if it only applies to Orders?

Also CONTRACT shows only Assassin syntax and REQUEST shows 'I don't recognise that as a valid request.'

Davio

Being a knight has no real influence on how our players enjoy the game

Not being able to use a system that is in place for the protection and help of people who are unable to deal with someone stronger than them is not the same kind of problem

The problem isn't that our marks want to sit and do nothing but be marks, it's that there is now a system, hard coded, that we can do nothing with because it makes no sense for us

the previous system wasn't better because you could sit on markwho and do nothing, it was better because we legitimately had a choice to say no to an Ashtani who tried to hire us. Now we'll be aiding them, and no matter what Atlantia says, that's not something we can allow ourselves to partake in

Xith

Valid point if you're a Champion. It's more about the cause than the gold. I suppose you could allow Ivory to CONTRACTS REFUSE <org> so that they aren't assigned anything from Ashtani/etc.?

Kinilan

Targossas can't use the credit market. They might be buying from city enemies.

Targossas can't shop in stores that are rented out. They might be buying goods from city enemies

Targossas can't use the auction house on Meropis. They might be buying from enemies

Enemies getting your gold from the means above are fine but oh no, we can't have our enemies killing our enemies. You ignore your laws on the above so why apply them to hiring marks?  You're being hypocritical and solipsistic to demand the system change to suit your tastes.

Jacen

Davio said:

Being a knight has no real influence on how our players enjoy the game

Not being able to use a system that is in place for the protection and help of people who are unable to deal with someone stronger than them is not the same kind of problem

The problem isn't that our marks want to sit and do nothing but be marks, it's that there is now a system, hard coded, that we can do nothing with because it makes no sense for us

the previous system wasn't better because you could sit on markwho and do nothing, it was better because we legitimately had a choice to say no to an Ashtani who tried to hire us. Now we'll be aiding them, and no matter what Atlantia says, that's not something we can allow ourselves to partake in

To the bolded: The victims (hirers) retain full use of the system. Why does it matter to Targossas who the person that gets the contract is? They will still fulfill your goals by completing the contract. Take the same logic you are already implementing (The ends justify the means) and apply it to the new mark system: doesn't matter who gets the contract, the end result (assuming the contract is completed) is the same: the betterment of New Good. Doesn't matter if an Ashtani or a Mhaldorian does it for you, ultimately the work is done for the benefit of New Good.

Arador

Kinilan said:

Targossas can't use the credit market. They might be buying from city enemies.

Targossas can't shop in stores that are rented out. They might be buying goods from city enemies

Targossas can't use the auction house on Meropis. They might be buying from enemies

Enemies getting your gold from the means above are fine but oh no, we can't have our enemies killing our enemies. You ignore your laws on the above so why apply them to hiring marks?  You're being hypocritical and solipsistic to demand the system change to suit your tastes.

While I realise that death as a concept in Achaea is just a temporary inconvenience to the players but I would like to think that there is a slight difference between giving gold to an enemy because he sold credits and allowing your character to go against his RP and alignment to do the dirty work of an enemy by slaying someone for him. You can not really compare those examples to the mark system because in those cases you are not actually doing something that reflects your character, personality, beliefs or values.

Buying a credit does not make you a good, evil, nice guy, asshole, or anything that defines you as a character. Slaying someone and why/how you do it, does. I mean by your runaway pseudo logic I should not buy credits because IRE is going to spend money on paying someone to develop features for enemy cities. There is massive difference between buying things that have anonymous from the start and that have no bearing on your character's personality and simply killing anyone for anyone.

Silas

Kinilan said:

Targossas can't use the credit market. They might be buying from city enemies.

Targossas can't shop in stores that are rented out. They might be buying goods from city enemies

Targossas can't use the auction house on Meropis. They might be buying from enemies

Enemies getting your gold from the means above are fine but oh no, we can't have our enemies killing our enemies. You ignore your laws on the above so why apply them to hiring marks?  You're being hypocritical and solipsistic to demand the system change to suit your tastes.

If credits were a purely IC currency, we'd probably have something in place to police the trading of them between citizens and enemies. Citizens are already not allowed to deal with enemies, including buying things from enemies, so your points are really all moot.

Jacen said:

There are very legitimate concerns in the thread, the most legitimate I see being that the mark doesn't know who hired them. That concern makes perfect sense for Targossas: a Targossian mark doesn't want to aid an Ashtani or Mhaldorian or Hashani in their plights. 

That being said, it shouldn't matter to the hirer who the contract was given to. Because of the new anonymity, the hirer is essentially paying an organization for a service.

I can understand why the Ivory Mark is upset at having their "Champion for the Weak" RP taken away, and I think that's a legitimate concern as well. What I don't understand is why the Targossians are the ones most upset about it... Isn't the benevolence of Ivory Mark just the kind of thing you swore off? You got all up in arms over not wanting a Knight program because that sort of honor doesn't belong in Targossas, but you want an honorable Mark program?

It matters to Targossians who the contract is given to because, in the same way we don't champion our enemies, we don't allow our citizens to ask our enemies to champion them.

None of this has anything to do with honour, so I don't much understand your last point. We have no interest in championing the weak, though, when the weak are our enemies.

Jacen said:

Davio said:

Not being able to use a system that is in place for the protection and help of people who are unable to deal with someone stronger than them is not the same kind of problem

To the bolded: The victims (hirers) retain full use of the system. Why does it matter to Targossas who the person that gets the contract is? They will still fulfill your goals by completing the contract. Take the same logic you are already implementing (The ends justify the means) and apply it to the new mark system: doesn't matter who gets the contract, the end result (assuming the contract is completed) is the same: the betterment of New Good. Doesn't matter if an Ashtani or a Mhaldorian does it for you, ultimately the work is done for the benefit of New Good.

This is the problem with people weighing in on matters they don't understand. You think it doesn't matter for us who does our work for us, but it does. This isn't the era of the godawful Codex of Light, with the "greater Good" and the ends justifying the means. In Targossas, convenience is no excuse to forsake your ideals. If it is essential that somebody else absolutely must take the contract, then yes, it would be justified; but it's not.

Jarrod

While I don't agree with the logic on both ends of the spectrum, I can understand the concern this situation creates for Targossas.

I think the only reasonable system that would cover Targossians concerns would be an entirely new org called the Champions of Light or something like that, that only Targossian Marks can join and only Targossian citizens can hire through. Every other idea I've heard to address the concern heavily dilutes the Ivory Mark or basically turns it into the old system, which are exceptionally boring compared to the new opportunities this new system creates.

Xith

Well you find out who hired you after you complete the contract, so if it turns out to be Ashtani, the obvious solution is to add UNSLAY <person> to undo your contract. Lol right?

EDIT: But for a serious idea, maybe prevent orgs with mutually declared hostilities from accepting contracts issued by opposing members, so the system sorts that out similar to the way targets get prevented.

Saeva

Poor Targ, alone in it's principles.

Strata

Jarrod said:

While I don't agree with the logic on both ends of the spectrum, I can understand the concern this situation creates for Targossas.

I think the only reasonable system that would cover Targossians concerns would be an entirely new org called the Champions of Light or something like that, that only Targossian Marks can join and only Targossian citizens can hire through. Every other idea I've heard to address the concern heavily dilutes the Ivory Mark or basically turns it into the old system, which are exceptionally boring compared to the new opportunities this new system creates.

Exactly. Just give Targossas the special cake. I don't think anyone's going to be jealous.

Silas

Life so hard.

I'll just go and console myself with my brand new city built specifically for me, brb.

Arador

@Jarrod we have an organisation for those cases and it is called the Ivory Mark, who by their very design are not in it for the money but do it for the principle. You talk about worry of watering down the Ivory Mark but that is essentially what this system does. It just makes them another flavour of the Quisalis.

Champions do it for a different reason, not just the money and that reason is intrinsically tied to their characters values. No need to create a third mark.

Also this problem is not limited to Targossas. Maldaathi and Wardens have it too and I would like to think that there could be a variety of characters from all cities that would prefer the role of principled Champion over mindless assassin.

Feral

Targossas can't be the only city with laws against helping your enemies.

The issue of gold going to an enemy is only the least part of it. As @arador points out this system has you taking action first and only learning who was assisted by that action second. If orgs stay true to their RP this is going to cause issues beyond Targossas.

Sena

Xith said:

EDIT: But for a serious idea, maybe prevent orgs with mutually declared hostilities from accepting contracts issued by opposing members, so the system sorts that out similar to the way targets get prevented.

This isn't really a solution, Ashtan and Targossas (for example) are always enemies even when they're not currently in an officially declared war (which is what mutual hostility is, full-scale war where all soldiers (or all members for orgs other than cities) can be freely attacked).

Bluef

Kinilan said:

Targossas can't use the credit market. They might be buying from city enemies.

Targossas can't shop in stores that are rented out. They might be buying goods from city enemies

Targossas can't use the auction house on Meropis. They might be buying from enemies

Enemies getting your gold from the means above are fine but oh no, we can't have our enemies killing our enemies. You ignore your laws on the above so why apply them to hiring marks?  You're being hypocritical and solipsistic to demand the system change to suit your tastes.

Yes, these were along the same ideas that came to my mind. It baffles me that people find it impossible to find a way to roleplay these changes. A Targossian champion who completes a contract for an Ashtani, for example, could (easily) roleplay that the plight was deemed severe enough to warrant their efforts and that Good won out in the end, and so on. 

@Jacen said: That concern makes perfect sense for Targossas: a Targossian mark doesn't want to aid an Ashtani or Mhaldorian or Hashani in their plights. 

I'm not 100% sure I agree, but I also think they are coming out with some tweaks to help off set these concerns. That said...

It seems like Marks obviously respond to something outside their respective cities and those allegiances already. For example: Atlantia calls all the Ivory Mark to her side. Derillin does likewise. They inform those gathered that they will skirmish the opposing Mark faction for <insert reasons here>. Would Ivory Marks in <insertcitynamehere> really have issues with fighting fellow <insertcitynamehere> Quisalis? 

I've never heard of this kind of conflict raising concerns before. I though it was understood that entering whichever Mark faction you choose means you may face the other side, and that citizenship was inconsequential to the duty to do so. That doesn't mean that you're throwing off your allegiance to <insertidealshere> only that Marks are not solely the sum of their citizenship. 

Antonius

Why can't we have decent forums with working quotes?

"It seems like Marks obviously respond to something outside their respective cities and those allegiances already. For example: Atlantia calls all the Ivory Mark to her side. Derillin does likewise. They inform those gathered that they will skirmish the opposing Mark faction for <insert reasons here>. Would Ivory Marks in <insertcitynamehere> really have issues with fighting fellow <insertcitynamehere> Quisalis?"

Targossian Champions definitely wouldn't fight against Targossian Assassins; they'd either not attack each other during the battle or simply sit out. Any conflict between the Ivory and Quisalis Marks is considerably less important than their duty to the Bloodsworn.

Bluef

Antonius said:

Why can't we have decent forums with working quotes?

"It seems like Marks obviously respond to something outside their respective cities and those allegiances already. For example: Atlantia calls all the Ivory Mark to her side. Derillin does likewise. They inform those gathered that they will skirmish the opposing Mark faction for <insert reasons here>. Would Ivory Marks in <insertcitynamehere> really have issues with fighting fellow <insertcitynamehere> Quisalis?"

Targossian Champions definitely wouldn't fight against Targossian Assassins; they'd either not attack each other during the battle or simply sit out. Any conflict between the Ivory and Quisalis Marks is considerably less important than their duty to the Bloodsworn.

Then maybe Marks should be factionalized. Then again, if its factionalized entire cities may have no one to turn to to acceptance contracts because all the Marks that actually do anything may be in Ashtan, etc.

Or maybe like @Strata @Strata @Strata said, certain people should just quit Mark so they can continue their single minded roleplay of "nothing else come before <yxz>"

Arador

Yeah I am sorry but citizenship, divine order, house (sorry Targossas, too soon?) personal character development, friendships, loyalty and alignment are going to dwarf Mark Faction in the decisions of any character.

Why do people keep going on as if joining Mark should overrule everything else about their character?

Xith

Bluef said:

Antonius said:

Why can't we have decent forums with working quotes?

"It seems like Marks obviously respond to something outside their respective cities and those allegiances already. For example: Atlantia calls all the Ivory Mark to her side. Derillin does likewise. They inform those gathered that they will skirmish the opposing Mark faction for <insert reasons here>. Would Ivory Marks in <insertcitynamehere> really have issues with fighting fellow <insertcitynamehere> Quisalis?"

Targossian Champions definitely wouldn't fight against Targossian Assassins; they'd either not attack each other during the battle or simply sit out. Any conflict between the Ivory and Quisalis Marks is considerably less important than their duty to the Bloodsworn.

Then maybe Marks should be factionalized. Then again, if its factionalized entire cities may have no one to turn to to acceptance contracts because all the Marks that actually do anything may be in Ashtan, etc.

Or maybe like @Strata @Strata @Strata said, certain people should just quit Mark so they can continue their single minded roleplay of "nothing else come before <yxz>"

I hear if you say his name three times...

Jarrod

Arador said:

@Jarrod we have an organisation for those cases and it is called the Ivory Mark, who by their very design are not in it for the money but do it for the principle. You talk about worry of watering down the Ivory Mark but that is essentially what this system does. It just makes them another flavour of the Quisalis. Champions do it for a different reason, not just the money and that reason is intrinsically tied to their characters values. No need to create a third mark. Also this problem is not limited to Targossas. Maldaathi and Wardens have it too and I would like to think that there could be a variety of characters from all cities that would prefer the role of principled Champion over mindless assassin.

I'm not opposed to minor modifications to the Ivory Mark to set it apart from the Quisalis. Seeing the reason and the option to deny it within the first half day to a day could be interesting. There are lots of bad ideas going around though.

• Any idea that lets the Mark see who is hiring
• Any idea that lets the Mark decline after seeing the target

Those two ideas rapidly push the system back towards the old system, which should not be the goal. Restricting -pools- of players on each side is something that could possibly work. If a city could set rules for its Ivory Marks, a sort of Mark system to City relationship that the city leader or city Patron could set. "Contracts can be accepted from" and "Contracts can be given to" fields that are default anyone, but can be given any city or 'rogue' as modfiers (allowing multiple modifiers). I would suggest this only for Ivory though, as has been stated in this thread the Quisalis is not a reputable bunch. Joining the Quisalis Mark is effectively saying "I will kill anyone for a price", and changing that would be bad in my opinion.

Silas

An option to include both Champions and Assassins available to all cities would be ideal. Bluef actually highlights one of the worst features of the pseudo-RP of the Mark orgs as they exist currently, where events between them require a complete suspension of disbelief as Mhaldorian, Ashtani and Targossian Champions are expected to put aside their differences to help Atlantia dig behind the sofa cushions for her TV remote.

If we could get Mark orgs more tailored to the current state of the game, and tie them to the cities, all parties would be happy. There are denizens in each of the cities that could handle contracts already for citizens and distribute them in the exact same way to Marks from that city. The current Mark orgs could exist for rogues and for people in more lax organisations.

For Orders, I think it'd be nice if we could keep the option open of choosing who you hire, or allowing them to set a default person that contracts should go to, in order to retain the RP of appointed Order Champions.

Bluef

Silas said:

An option to include both Champions and Assassins available to all cities would be ideal. Bluef actually highlights one of the worst features of the pseudo-RP of the Mark orgs as they exist currently, where events between them require a complete suspension of disbelief as Mhaldorian, Ashtani and Targossian Champions are expected to put aside their differences to help Atlantia dig behind the sofa cushions for her TV remote.

If we could get Mark orgs more tailored to the current state of the game, and tie them to the cities, all parties would be happy. There are denizens in each of the cities that could handle contracts already for citizens and distribute them in the exact same way to Marks from that city. The current Mark orgs could exist for rogues and for people in more lax organisations.

For Orders, I think it'd be nice if we could keep the option open of choosing who you hire, or allowing them to set a default person that contracts should go to, in order to retain the RP of appointed Order Champions.

The issue with this is that rogues could easily lose the ability to hire Marks (again). 

Edit: I guess it would depend on how many rogue Marks there were at any given time. Or rogues could go through the Quisalis only, which might not be factionalized into cities?

Kayeil

I am not sure if an Order appointed Champion would be a realistic option for all Orders at this point. Mine has maybe two combatants, one which is a Mark but is probably not here often enough to handle all contracts, and the other seems to always have OT turned off so they don't even pay any attention.

@Pandora, we must acquire more bloodthirsty minions.

Silas

Yeah, it doesn't need to be mandated. Smaller or less combative Orders should be allowed to hire an outside Champion/Assassin, or just take out a contract like a private citizen with one of the Mark organisations.