|
Post by Yves Eau on Mar 27, 2020 10:24:24 GMT
Okay, makes sense. So should one also be able to carouse, and take a mistress along to the theatre? (It may already be included, I don't have the rules to hand.) I don't see anything specifically allowing mistresses, but they can be persuaded to act in a play, so surely they will agree to watch it. You would have to pay for their seat, presumably. Carousing is not mentioned. It would make sense to me to allow it, so attendees can buy 1 SP if not attending an after-show party. At least, then, theatre after opening night is not a dead loss. I see the rules double the price of seats (from 5 to 10 crowns) for opening night, as a cost of attending the party. If we allowed parties in other weeks, we should consider this. It seems the additional money paid by attendees does not find its way to the poor writer who must host the party. The party rule seems very much to assume a PC playwright will have a patron. Perhaps this duty of hosting parties is intended to prevent playwrights from making money too easily. We shall soon find out how it works.
|
|
|
Post by gaston on Mar 27, 2020 12:41:38 GMT
It doesn't really matter. In this circumstance completing a three week course at medical school is merely to get the character (who must already have Med Skill of 3+ anyway) on the professional ladder as a neophyte. (Much more feasible than waiting months to throw Med Skill or less on 2D6, then spending two weeks on an 'important case' in hopes of getting an 'As Expected' result or better).
Historically, Medicine wasn't that advanced in most areas, but hopefully it would be marginally better than the 'eye of newt and toe of frog' suggested by the crone on the corner. Leeches / bleeding were actually the only means available to lower blood pressure at the time - not as dumb as it first sounds. Having said that, the favoured method of reviving unconscious patients was to blow tobocco smoke up their rectums - hence the expression to 'blow smoke up your ass.'
Probably me that mentioned but, with the existing additions, I think this is largely going to take care of itself. The more characters there are writing plays, the more difficult it will be to get one produced. If companies take options on plays and pay writers only when the plays are produced (rather than paying writers on acceptance) then each company will start to have a priority list regards future performances. Script quality will be the first consideration (with new Triumphant Successes bumping any Very Well Dones there might already be in the cupboard etc.), and the length of time since acceptance being the second (those Triumphant Successes which have been in the cupboard longest taking priority over new ones).
So, if Sebastian Cribbler writes a play called 'Carry on Countess', getting 'Average Job' on SCR roll, has it accepted by the Duke's Men, but the company already has an 'As Expected', 'Very Well Done' and 'Triumphant Success' in the cupboard awaiting production, then Carry on Countess is unlikely to ever make it to the stage and S.Cribbler unlikely to ever get paid for it. So, what can he do?
1) Attempt to book the Theatre Royal in one of the months usually taken by the King's Men or Archduke's Men. (If either has a PC's play lined up for production next, then it will be the slot after this which gets booked). Requires a 4+ to persuade the Theatre Royal Director.
2) If this fails attempt to book any PC owned theatre for a month outside the Duke's Men Theatre Royal Schedule (PCs can choose who they hire out their theatres to - but are likely to prioritise those most likely to sell most tickets) or failing that book the Cock Pit (if available).
Theatre booking fees must be paid up front, which may require the writer taking out a loan (though since covering theatre hire is a production's first priority, he will get it back).
Writing a 'Could Have Been Better' or worse gives even fewer options. Only the Archduke's Men will take it (-1 on the Play Outcome Roll), and they'll only stage it at the Cock Pit (presuming no PC Theatre Owner will take it) which is another -1. And if it's a flop, it will be more difficult for the writer to get plays accepted in the future.
Getting plays staged is going to be difficult enough as it is, I think, without bringing in SL as an additional complication.
As Yves pointed out, it's currently a premonthly action. I agree with Sam that it doesn't need to be more difficult than that.
|
|
|
Post by gaston on Mar 27, 2020 13:01:54 GMT
I expect so. Since actors and actresses will only be able to attend the Opening Night party (and be unable to attend any others) this will be the only chance their beaux get of satisfying FC with them that month.
Agreed, though I think it's still unlikely that PCs will visit the theatre without attending an associated party...
Already suggested that this be scrapped.
|
|
|
Post by Ymbert Montgomery on Mar 27, 2020 13:07:00 GMT
On church, we mostly lost that because of changing over to the TOH honours and I'm fine changing it back.
It does have a knockon effect on regimental chaplains, but realistically our church players have shown no interest in those positions anyway. (I suspect not going to war is a major draw of the career).
|
|
|
Post by Adam de la Bassée on Mar 27, 2020 16:03:58 GMT
On church, we mostly lost that because of changing over to the TOH honours and I'm fine changing it back. It does have a knockon effect on regimental chaplains, but realistically our church players have shown no interest in those positions anyway. (I suspect not going to war is a major draw of the career). I think the biggest issue with the Chaplaincy is the general lack of flexibility. It is a "job" so to speak, but not being able to hold public services or act in Paris. The other side to the coin is it is a low end position and as such does not show any real progression; as in once a Regimental Chaplain, always a chaplain until you leave.
|
|
|
Post by huillaume on Mar 29, 2020 18:05:27 GMT
Minor typo:
I guess it whould be final, not finial...
|
|
|
Post by gaston on Mar 30, 2020 9:17:42 GMT
A couple of further suggestions related to this:
The above suggestion was made to cover the eventuality of a PC actor in an established company appearing in their regular Theatre Royal slot and also in a writer-secured slot for their company in the preceding / following month. Provision should also be made for actors 'moonlighting' in plays written by acquaintances which are not being staged by the actor's company. I suggest the following:
- When a theatre slot has been secured, in addition to engaging beautiful mistresses for the production PC writers may (each) invite one PC actor to take part.
- PC Producers may invite as many PC actors as they wish to take part in their shows.
- Provided they don't clash with their scheduled company productions, PC Actors with established companies may accept invitations to take part in non-company productions. Actors taking part in productions which do clash with those of their company, or in productions staged by bitter rivals of their company, will be dismissed by their current company and never allowed to rejoin it.
|
|
|
Post by Yves Eau on Apr 2, 2020 13:43:02 GMT
Do all guests have to toady to the owner (or an assigned delegate, if the owner is not at the race)? There are at least three aspects to this question. - Can the owner defer to another character, who then receives toadies?
- Is there only one person in the box to whom a guest can toady, or can they split up according to SL?
- If the owner has more than one box, does each have its own toady structure, or does the owner host (and receive toadies from) all the guests?
|
|
|
Post by Father William Souris on Apr 2, 2020 13:48:23 GMT
There was a rule before than 1 box no matter how many horses a PC had in race. Has this changed?
|
|
|
Post by Ymbert Montgomery on Apr 2, 2020 15:26:37 GMT
Between you you've actually spotted an inconsistency in the rules.
I'm going with the one box per owner rule, not per horse.
Yes. In fact that's considered the default if a royal turns up! (Quick off the cuff ruling; a royal does not count towards the four maximum guests). So a guest of honour with higher SL is allowed.
Only one; it's like a party.
|
|
|
Post by huillaume on Apr 2, 2020 16:22:29 GMT
Only one; it's like a party. THe party rules seem to me contradictory in this point: So, it seems to me this means the host can allow many people to toady with him (and I understand this is reciprocal). But in the same point: That's why I say I feel them contradictory... Anohter point: I don't find anywhere in the toadying rules specifies that one must carouse to toady, but in several other rules it seems to be assumed carousing is a must. So: can you toady without carousing?
|
|
|
Post by Ymbert Montgomery on Apr 2, 2020 17:09:51 GMT
An individual may not toady and be toadied to in the same week, and may only toady to one person. That one isn't contradictory. An individual may not toady to more than one person. An individual may be toadied to by many people. You can. (That was put in because some players really don't like the drunkeneness table). However, that does bring the issue of priests up; it removes one of their advantages. What do people think to giving them a bonus sp as if they were carousing when they're at a club etc.?
|
|
|
Post by huillaume on Apr 2, 2020 18:04:36 GMT
Then I guess I don't understand the phrasing of the rule in this sense (though I understand, or so I think, its spirit and game effect): According the rules: - If you are toadied, you cannot toady yourself
- you can be toadied by more than one person, but you can toady only one
- the lower SL character, be him the one who toadies or the one who is toadied, receives SP equal to half SL difference, rounded up
- the higher SL character, be him the one who toadies or the one who is toadied, receives (or losses) SP according to table
- if both are same SL, both receive 1 SP.
- the host of a party allows everyone to toady with him (or guest of honor, i there's one)
Right to now? Now let's imagine Huillaume )SL 14) hosts a party. The guests are Franóis (SL 13) Pierre (SL 12), Alain (SL 11) and Georges (SL 10). All of them toady with Huillaume, so they receive 1 SP (Franóis and Pierre) and 2 SP (alain and Georges). But if we follow the rules to the letter, Huillaume cannot toady, but, being toadies himself by everyone, he would receive SPs according the table, so 1 SP each for Franóis, Pierre and Alain, and no SPs for Pierre... Nonehteless, I understand the spirit of the rule is you cannoly benefit from one toady per event, so Huillaume would receive only 1 SP. What am I wrong in all this mess?
|
|
|
Post by Yves Eau on Apr 2, 2020 18:14:22 GMT
Huillaume would receive 3 SP. As you say, one from each of Franóis, Pierre, and Alain.
As Louis said,
|
|
|
Post by Ymbert Montgomery on Apr 2, 2020 18:15:21 GMT
You're wrong in that nothing says you don't get SP for being toadied to by several people. So in this case Hullaume would gain 3 SP, not 1.
|
|