Covert Guild Turnover Policy

[Gavin]

The Brotherhood needs a goal, ideals that won't change. What it doesn't need is a band-aid slapped over the problem, and honestly I think that would be what this is. It would cause more issues than it would solve.

I don't seem to agree with Leech on much, but I think he is bang-on this time. What we maybe should do is sit down and actually bang out a hard idea of what the Brotherhood is really all about.

I mean, the Manus are about teaching and sheltering mages, the Order is about spreading the word of Dav and roasting people, the Knights hunt mages, etc. What is the Brotherhood about? Okay, they're criminals, sure, but that's is such a wide margin, you know?

I don't have any idea on what exactly that would be, but I do think that it would have something to do with them being devoted to helping South side.

I think that could be part of it.

I've long thought that the Brotherhood should be a breeding ground for progressives, anarcho-capitalists, social workers, misfits, and free thinkers. Helping Southside counts (but, remember, that's a goal they can share with plenty of "nice" folks too).

What would, in my mind, differentiate the Brotherhood (which, under this amalgamation would actually be a fraternity of shared ideas and ideals) is that the status quo is unsustainable. Hell, maybe the Brotherhood can be the definition of the 99%.

Their ideals shouldn't necessarily include toppling the monarchy, because any objective person can see that a benevolent ruler is better than a despot, and a despot is better than civil war. But I'd rather see them publish tracts on income inequality and its negative effects, or plaster posters of a starving, cute, toothless Southside girl to tug at our heartstrings, than do something tried and tired like pickpocket folks.

Maybe they'd have some fringe elements that would be more radical and more violent. Or maybe they'd be peaceful and urge for social change. But I think change is what ought to define them, in a way that would be attractive to University students, certain nobles, the disaffected poor, and others; and in a way that would make more than "the man" their enemy-- why not try to dismantle the Merchants' Guild, which does more to keep wealth away from Southside than any minor baron or gentry-man? Why not seek to take over the University and use it as an agent of social change?

And so forth.

Just my take on it.

[Annalesa]

What would, in my mind, differentiate the Brotherhood (which, under this amalgamation would actually be a fraternity of shared ideas and ideals) is that the status quo is unsustainable. Hell, maybe the Brotherhood can be the definition of the 99%.

Their ideals shouldn't necessarily include toppling the monarchy, because any objective person can see that a benevolent ruler is better than a despot, and a despot is better than civil war. But I'd rather see them publish tracts on income inequality and its negative effects, or plaster posters of a starving, cute, toothless Southside girl to tug at our heartstrings, than do something tried and tired like pickpocket folks.

Maybe they'd have some fringe elements that would be more radical and more violent. Or maybe they'd be peaceful and urge for social change. But I think change is what ought to define them, in a way that would be attractive to University students, certain nobles, the disaffected poor, and others; and in a way that would make more than "the man" their enemy-- why not try to dismantle the Merchants' Guild, which does more to keep wealth away from Southside than any minor baron or gentry-man? Why not seek to take over the University and use it as an agent of social change?

This would make sense on several levels, the least of which that the organization is illegal when, frankly, I don't see that the nobles should really care about a bunch of people that deal drugs to the commoners and is a band of pick-pockets when those are going to exist, anyway.

I confess that, per the usual, I am hesitant to make such radical changes and rigidly codify them, but I do believe that there is something to this.

I do wonder, however, how we would go about combining this with the overall ideal that the Brotherhood is sort of like the mob. Of course, I suppose that this could be the point? The overall ideal being taking from the rich/stupid/immoral and redistributing it, sort of like a Medieval version of socialism/communism/I confess my ignorance over the proper economic term here?

I know that, on Seilena, she abused her place as Tenebrae to take several weeks to force some of the vNPCs to learn to read. Perhaps they could be really obsessed with the Davite ideal of charity and the law of giving? This could explain why the Church does not necessarily like the Brotherhood, but, at the same time, isn't running around screeching about just kind of burning Southside to the ground (at least not in any way, you know, traditionally until after they find a bunch of mages running around in the Brotherhood).

I don't know if this makes any sense, but I'm wondering if a lot of what is being said here isn't already a bit part of theme, it's just that the general idea hasn't been really codified yet?

[Leech]

Socialism and a focus on Dav's law of charity and giving is what Naer was all about. I even made a little manifesto - somebody compared it to communism, so I just kind of rolled with it. Unfortunately that plot line didn't take off after Naer's death.

So, while I completely love Gavin's idea of how theme should be, I feel like I'm just a bit biased here =P

[Dice]

Honestly, I think that this theme is implied in many places (look at the name! The Brotherhood of COMMON GOODS - socialism!) and it wouldn't be that big a change to really bring it to the forefront. And it would greatly enrich their RP to make it official, and add some interesting conflict; many of the folks whose goals might otherwise dovetail with theirs are gentry/nobility, more or less their sworn enemies.

On another note, I'm not a big fan of the no-leaving situation because it ultimately just causes a lot of work and trouble when people inevitably do want to leave and we have to figure out how in the world to handle it. It comes down to either staff have to enforce it for the thieves (REALLY not cool, imho) or it's violated repeatedly. Now I'd be cool if this was something more variable that the Thieves COULD enforce if they chose to, but having it as blanket policy seems to birth more trouble than fun.

I'd kind of like to see some edits to the thief culture/helpfiles to specify three things:
1) this socialism theme;
2) some regimes don't allow people to leave alive, but it's not universal;
3) open magery in the ghall (which is full of vnpc thieves, come on people!) will get you ousted because the vNPC thieves are no more heretical than any other population, by and large

[Atholos]

3) open magery in the ghall (which is full of vnpc thieves, come on people!) will get you ousted because the vNPC thieves are no more heretical than any other population, by and large

I'll just throw this out there, when I was Tene and I took in some mages they wanted a secret room they could practice in. Being a mage supporter I had found a secret room in the GH and I told them they could practice there. Occasionally magery would be practiced outside the secret room but it was an extremely rare thing to happen as far as I know.