|
Post by gaston on Apr 23, 2020 11:16:51 GMT
This thread opened primarily to discuss the following amendments Taking the initial one first. The assumption that most actors will work as playwrights is a false assumption already. Just because a character has a high Etiquette score (for acting) doesn't mean that his Admin, Music and/or Dancing will be sufficiently up to snuff regarding writing theatrical works. There is also contradiction here, in that the Actors rules state If Actors don't get on the artistic ranks table in the first place, how can they achieve the rank of practitioner? I'm assuming that this idea arose in order to cut the income of actors - even though acting/rehearsal fees have already been severely cut back from (3 x Skill Level)/ week to a flat 15L/week ? The above means that actors will get a maximum of 15 lives per week, but only when rehearsing or appearing. In contrast, playwrights who also act will get Monthly Pay as Artist Rehearsal / Appearance Fees of 15L/week Writers Fees of 70 per Production Why are actors who _aren't_ playwrights getting such a kicking ? I really feel that actor should have access to the ranking system as actors too. It they are playwrights too they still only get the benefits once...
|
|
|
Post by Ymbert Montgomery on Apr 23, 2020 11:42:33 GMT
I'm assuming that this idea arose in order to cut the income of actors - even though acting/rehearsal fees have already been severely cut back from (3 x Skill Level)/ week to a flat 15L/week ? The above means that actors will get a maximum of 15 lives per week, but only when rehearsing or appearing. In contrast, playwrights who also act will get Monthly Pay as Artist Rehearsal / Appearance Fees of 15L/week Writers Fees of 70 per Production Why are actors who _aren't_ playwrights getting such a kicking ? I really feel that actor should have access to the ranking system as actors too. It they are playwrights too they still only get the benefits once... Actually, my concern is the opposite. I'm not sure the rules currently support actors as a viable career without playwrights being part of that. They don't get benefits from the higher career levels, where playwrights get a bonus to plays. They have no control over their progression or ways to increase ability through plays. So this was largely a stopgap measure because of it feeling underpowered!
|
|
|
Post by Yves Eau on Apr 23, 2020 11:44:10 GMT
Where does it say in the revised rules that actors do not use the ranking system? It seems to say in places they do.
Section 35 appears to apply equally to actors, though they are not mentioned in the column heading. Doctors, though, have been removed. Actors are specifically mentioned as having ranks. The only change I can see to the Actors section (35.20-27, starting on p. 142) is the rate of pay for rehearsal and performance.
|
|
|
Post by Yves Eau on Apr 23, 2020 11:52:03 GMT
A couple of obvious typos there, but my question is whether the beau of a mistress who performed can accompany her. I would expect her to bring her current lover, even if he is not the one who encouraged her to participate.
|
|
|
Post by Ymbert Montgomery on Apr 23, 2020 11:58:40 GMT
A couple of obvious typos there, but my question is whether the beau of a mistress who performed can accompany her. I would expect her to bring her current lover, even if he is not the one who encouraged her to participate. A definite yes I think there; she needs a dancing partner after all!
|
|
|
Post by gaston on Apr 23, 2020 12:17:50 GMT
I'm not sure the rules currently support actors as a viable career without playwrights being part of that. They don't get benefits from the higher career levels, where playwrights get a bonus to plays. They have no control over their progression or ways to increase ability through plays. So this was largely a stopgap measure because of it feeling underpowered! So why not change the header for the last column in Artists table from Additional Info for Playwrights to Additional Info for Actors and Playwrights? Having good actors in a production would increase its chances of success, and Royalty would be more likely to attend productions featuring famous actors. (Obviously, actor/playwrights would only get these bonuses once ). As to control / progression etc., surely the better their performances, the quicker they rise through the artist ranks ? Should now be Writers Fees of (reduced to 50) per (increased to Acceptance). More on these points anon
|
|
|
Post by Ymbert Montgomery on Apr 23, 2020 12:37:25 GMT
On Progression, I mostly mean that they're not making ability rolls in the same ways as the other careers.
|
|
|
Post by Gaston2 on Apr 23, 2020 12:40:42 GMT
OK, from the above I'd suggest that section 35.27 be changed to
The addition is to cover the possibility of an actor appearing in one show, rehearsing for the next show in the final two weeks of that month, and the King commanding a Royal performance of the first show in the month when the second show is being staged.
|
|
|
Post by gaston on Apr 23, 2020 12:43:53 GMT
On Progression, I mostly mean that they're not making ability rolls in the same ways as the other careers. But they are though aren't they? They're making SCRs against Etiquette, Music or Dancing (depending upon whether they are appearing in a play, opera or ballet) to determine how good their performance is - and may improve their skills on a die roll of 5 or 6 in the usual way...
|
|
|
Post by Ymbert Montgomery on Apr 23, 2020 12:48:04 GMT
Royal Command performance sounds good.
On Skill checks, they technically don't at the moment although they could do. (With the standard SP from skill checks? So up to 2 more?)
|
|
|
Post by Yves Eau on Apr 23, 2020 12:50:19 GMT
On Progression, I mostly mean that they're not making ability rolls in the same ways as the other careers. Do they mean they roll less frequently than other careers? I see that an actor rolling once per performance would be less frequent than a playwright, who rolls each time he completes a play, then again for each one which is produced. Does an artist roll for producing a work then again when it is exhibited? Perhaps we could give an actor the same double roll for creation and display by allowing him to roll for the quality of rehearsals, though this would not affect the overall reception of the play, since the public would not see him practise. They already do.
|
|
|
Post by Ymbert Montgomery on Apr 23, 2020 13:05:52 GMT
I see that an actor rolling once per performance would be less frequent than a playwright, who rolls each time he completes a play, then again for each one which is produced. I don't think they do? The rules only say that the roll is made when written. At the moment, they roll each month. The easiest way to standardise it would be to change it to a roll for each two weeks work. That would work.
|
|
|
Post by gaston on Apr 23, 2020 13:22:46 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Ymbert Montgomery on Apr 23, 2020 13:25:53 GMT
One thing easy to miss and worth drawing attention to is that first night tickets now cost twice the amount, but get an extra SP.
I'm not sure if it's clear from the rules, but the intention here is to allow people to choose between that and a normal theatre night, even in the first week.
|
|
|
Post by Yves Eau on Apr 23, 2020 13:45:44 GMT
I was, indeed, wrong about performance rolls for playwrights. The roll for performance may gain (or lose) SPs for the playwright, but does not give him a chance of an ability uplift. - A playwright rolls only when he writes a play, which takes two weeks. Could be up to twice a month, but more likely every other month, maybe less, unless churning out plays which are not performed.
- An actor rolls only when he performs, so no more than once a month. Could be every month, if we allow rehearsals to overlap with performances. Probably every three months for now, for six weeks work, until private productions start.
- An artist rolls in every month he works on any piece (is that right?). Suggestion to bring this into line with playwrights.
Artists look to have it best of these three individual careers at the moment, in terms of skill checks, as they can work just one week each month for a roll. Another advantage is they can build up a portfolio and exhibit them together, whereas a playwright has to spend three further weeks on each play which is produced.
A playwright whose scripts are all performed puts in five weeks work for each roll: two for writing; two for rehearsals; first week of performances. However, lower-quality scripts are likely to be discarded, at least once he is established, so the average is likely to be lower than this.
I think actors are likely to roll less frequently, even when private productions start; they surely won't spend every week acting. An extra roll when rehearsing seems fair. If he did perform every month, overlapping with rehearsals, he would gain two rolls each month, the same as a playwright grinding out scripts. The actor would likely earn more whilst doing so, but the playwright may be able to sell the scripts later.
Actors who are also playwrights do very well out of the overlap. The extra three weeks the playwright spends on the production are, for him, part of his second job. Whilst he receives the standard retainer for only one career, he receives benefits for both. Dare I suggest we deny an actor the additional skill check for rehearsals if he wrote the play?
|
|