Who can Bond Asha'man

[Elgee]

We've discussed this matter at length, but I can't remember if it was on the Staff board, or if it was here. What with DM going down all the time, I'm not even going to attempt to hunt that down, so started a new thread.

 

Now as far as I can recall, we decided that apart from the Red Ajah (who weren't allowed to bond Warders anyway), any other Aes Sedai who wants to bond an Asha'man must have at least 1 "normal" Warder.

 

This is to be fair towards the Warder's Group - we don't want them to be totally neglected and ignore for the new "shiny toy" ... lol.

 

Firstly: is everyone OK with this? *looks hopeful and crosses fingers*

 

Secondly: if you are, then obviously the rule stating you're only allowed to bond 1 Warder is going to have to be changed for the Ajah's other than the Red (already done) and the Green (can already bond more than 1 Warder).

 

I'd like to get this sorted out ASAP, so could all the Ajah Heads please respond at your earliest convenience?

 

*much lovies*

[Mystica]

sounds more than fair to me, but I must (for the sake of realism, yes I know, I'm a pain that way) question who (besides Greens and Reds) would forego their long standing extremely strong Traditions of not bonding more than 1 Warder.

 

A bond between Aes Sedai and Ashaman could be considered not a Warder bond 'per sé', but it's close enough to one. And from the books we know there's AS bonding Ashaman and Ashaman bonding AS, determining which of the two holds the dominant position. An AS being bonded to an Ashaman who is also bonded to a Warder would give that Ashaman dominance not only over herself but also over her Warder 'through' her. Has this been discussed and taken into account?

 

I'm not really sure how real all this back and forth bonding would be....

[Wayward_fool]

I have to say I'm not keen on other Ajahs have more than one Bondmate. For one thing, it'd be weird for people like Whites and Browns to have more than one man underfoot. It doesn't happen in the books and if we're talking about being realistic it shouldn't happen here.

 

There aren't that many PC Ashaman anyway... About... 3? Including 2 who are here and not here and here and not here multiplied to a billion. I would know, I'm the only insanely active one there. *lol* So it's pretty slim pickings anyway. So I don't see us getting grief from the Warders group. *shrugs*

 

I DEFINITELY don't see Ashaman having dominance over Warders. The whole point in the book was to send unBonded Aes Sedai to deal with the Ashaman. If a non-Green already has a Warder I don't understand why she would even consider being Bonded to an Ashaman.

[Lavinya]

I have no issue with this. Like Boopsie said, there are very few active ashaman anyway, so it's not like everyone can rush out and nab one. And also, the Warders are kept as first pick. I think though, unlike a normal bonding where you don't need permission, it should be sought for bonding an ashaman (current plot line aside). It shouldn't become the norm to have more than one warder, so if you have to apply with a decent reason for wanting a crazy man bonding, it should keep it to a minimum, without hampering anyone's fun.

[Elgee]

Good ideas, guys.

 

Just remember one thing, please: just because there aren't many active Asha'man RPers right now, doesn't mean that we wont get a bucket load of them in at some time. Same goes for Warders, or AS. It would be best to set up rules now, rather than get things all confusing later.

 

Firstly, though, the idea is that AS are wanting to Bond with the Asha'man to control them. Read this post: http://forums.dragonmount.com/index.php/topic,49949.msg1709855.html#msg1709855 and at least the 1st 2 linked threads, and the last one, for full background.

 

In our STORYLINE, as many AS as possible are going to be asked to make this "sacrifice". If any of the Heads are against a) bonding Asha'man at all or b) allowing only 1 bond, that's fine. Just please all post NOW with your decision. I don't care which way you go, as long as the decision is made before we start on the Ajah Heads RP  :D

 

Lavi, I like your idea. To recap, this is what it says about Bonding in our rules (link:  http://whitetower.aliciawilkerson.com/?page_id=32):

 

No permission is required for an Aes Sedai, but in order for the bond to become official you must send an email of notification to the Division Leader with your handle and your warder’s name. This is for the purpose of record keeping and record keeping alone.

-Please note that your warder needs to contact his/her DL as well for this bond to be official.

 

I haven't every received one, so I think people have been slacking in this regard (myself included!). (makes note for Rashi to put this on our to-do list)

 

Here's what I propose be added for Bonding Asha'man:

 

(Firstly, what each Ajah decides with regards to this)

 

then procedure:

 

If anyone other than a Red wants to bond an Asha'man, they have to apply to their Ajah Head, the WT DL, and the Warder DL. The Warder DL will have veto right. (since she knows how many unbonded members she has, if any.

 

As I said, I don't particularly care which way you decide, but the one thing I will not compromise on is the Warder approval needed. There have been too many past incidences of the WT doing things that made other Divs unhappy, and I will NOT have a repeat of such actions under my watch.

 

Is this acceptable to everyone?

[Lavinya]

Totally agree with the warder rules Elgee!

 

Anyway, I like the set up you've proposed. For the Grays, I don't think they would stand against the bonding, but neither would they encourage it for themselves. If a Gray wants to bond an asha'man she must have bonded a warder already, and a good IC reason for wanting/needing a second warder. Other than that I have no issues with it.

 

Obviously a bond with an asha'man will have the same rules as with a warder, yes? As in they are not broken easily and shouldn't be entered into lightly, etc etc.

[Elgee]

Same rules, yes - if the AS is the Bond Holder. I must actually chat to Covai / Arath about what the rules are for AS being on the "wrong" end of the Bond.

[Mystica]

I will need to think on this for the Browns. If we allow it, it will have to be on a tight leash. I can totally see Browns bonding (or worse, létting themselves being bonded) by an Ashaman just to study the whole thing. I'll get back to you on it once I've had time to digest it.

[Elgee]

I can totally see the Browns doing that  ;D

[Rasheta Ardashir]

(makes note for Rashi to put this on our to-do list)

Done boss lady. *slides out quickly*

[Wayward_fool]

The only reason I see Yellows doing this is to use it as a means of studying the physical aspects of Bonding a channeler. How it affects the mind and body of those Bondmates. *shrugs* And there DEFINITELY will be a few of us who will want it. Myself included. Unfortunately, there really isn't anyone to Bond with at the moment.

 

There MIGHT be a sudden influx of BTers, but they'd have to go thru the usual routine of being Promoted...etc. It's definitely not gonna happen anytime soon.

 

I like the rules and have no problems with them. My only concern is in terms of how the decision of who holds the Bonds and stuff are decided.

[Lavinya]

Maybe the controller of the bond should be left in the hands of the pair planning to bond? Let them work out who is most logically going to demand control. Also, the Aes Sedai's current warder should be considered. Let them decide, let the powers that be know their preference when applying. If there are far too many Aes Sedai controlling BTers, the BT DL could rule as such and say that they would prefer the other way around. Or they could happily approve of their well thought out plan to bond in a logical way that provokes lots of fun and interesting rps. :)

[U4ea]

As a Green, I'm cool with whatever. I, too, don't see us straying too far from the 1-warder rule for the other Ajahs and, honestly, it's not like the Warder's Guild is teeming with Warders these days. While I realize that may not always be the case, I also don't want to see this becoming a stress for the unbonded Tower Guards to get bonded. I have one that will never be bonded and I'd like to keep the pressure off of her OOC'ly for it. Yeah, I know, what's the point of having a character there that's not bonded. Bah.

 

How about we make the rule that an offer has been made to bond a Warder, without any takers, instead of trying to foist off unbonded people just for the sake of saying they have a bond so they can bond an Ashaman? <--- read it a few times, it'll make sense in a minute... lol

[Wayward_fool]

How about we make the rule that an offer has been made to bond a Warder, without any takers, instead of trying to foist off unbonded people just for the sake of saying they have a bond so they can bond an Ashaman? <--- read it a few times, it'll make sense in a minute... lol

 

I had to read that multiple times to finally determine I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT THAT MEANS.

 

Also... *has a headache*

[Elgee]

It makes perfect sense to me  ;D

 

Basically, if you want to Bond your character, first go to the Warders yard. If there aren't any takers, then approach the BT. Should you hook up there, then you send your request in, stating that you DID try at the Warders first.

[Lavinya]

I have no issue with that, though it should be the exception. It is totally preferable that anyone approaching the BT boys for a bondmate has already got a warder. I'd hate to think of anyone wanting to bond a BTer and hunting down someone from the warder's yard just to be allowed at the BT.

 

Obviously there are going to be times when someone really really wants a warder, and there are just none out there that are willing. In that situation an allowance could theoretically be granted by the powers that be, but on a case by case basis I think. It shouldn't be the norm to be bonded to an asha'man for ANY ajah, I think.

[U4ea]

How about we make the rule that an offer has been made to bond a Warder, without any takers, instead of trying to foist off unbonded people just for the sake of saying they have a bond so they can bond an Ashaman? <--- read it a few times, it'll make sense in a minute... lol

 

I had to read that multiple times to finally determine I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT THAT MEANS.

 

Also... *has a headache*

 

You were just distracted by my awesome Greenness, love. It's ok. ;)

 

 

And yay! Someone understood my exhausted heap of words!

[Wayward_fool]

Wha...? *looks up from his admiration of Lor's "awesome Greenness"*

 

Y-yes... they are rather... awesome. *goes back to staring at Lor's "awesome Greenness"*

[SerenaMorrigan]

I agree with all of this. I definately thing that the guidlines are good to keep people in check. I certainly love having a Warder, when I'm bonded, and I also like the idea of some day being able to bond an Asha'man. I also agree with what Lavi said about keeping the already bonded Warder in the mix of the decision making, before one bonds an Ashie.

 

True, we may not have a lot of BTers at the moment, but I have seen that Div rise, fall, rise, and fall again. I, personally, think it depends on the time of year.  ;D

 

 

[Elgee]

So far we have this (correct me if I misunderstood you) (and this is a rough draft - we can pretty up the language once we are agreed on the details):

 

Bonding Rules (data to be changed in this link:  http://whitetower.aliciawilkerson.com/?page_id=32):

 

No permission is required for an Aes Sedai to bond someone from the Warder's Yard, but in order for the bond to become official you must send an email of notification to the Division Leader with your handle and your warder’s name. This is for the purpose of record keeping and record keeping alone.

-Please note that your warder needs to contact his/her DL as well for this bond to be official.

 

A PSW Admin brought this to my attention a while ago, which should be added in: Always keep in mind that Dragonmount is a PG-13 site, and that romantic relationships are supposed to be approved by the DL.

 

 

To add for Bonding Asha'man:

 

It is preferable to first see if anyone from the Warder's Yard is available. Should none be, or none whom you wish to Bond, then you may approach the Black Tower. No Aes Sedai, except Reds, may bond more than 1 Asha'man. See individual Ajahs for other specific Rules.

 

Bear in mind that there should be a balance between Aes Sedai being bond holders, and Asha'man being bond holders.

 

Black

Blue Blues are allowed to bond 1 Warder + 1 Asha'man, but they must have 1 Warder before they can bond an Asha'man

Brown

Gray If a Gray wants to bond an Asha'man she must have bonded a warder already, and a good IC reason for wanting/needing a second warder.

Green Greens may bond up to 3? 4? men, but only 1 Asha'man ....

Red Reds may only bond Asha'man. She may bond up to 3.

White

Yellow

then procedure:

 

If anyone other than a Red wants to bond an Asha'man, they have to apply to their Ajah Head, the WT DL, and the Warder DL. The Warder DL will have veto right.

 

Ok could each Head please post her official decision on this?

[SerenaMorrigan]

Wow! Reds can bond three Ashies??

 

I would also like the Blue's to have to bond a Warder before bonding an Asha'man from the TG as well, if one is available. Is there some procedure as to the limit of time someone should have to find a Warder from there (TG), before they say that there were none available and move on?

 

I can just see it happening. "I waited and waited and found no one, so I'd like to bond an Asha'man." When they didn't wait very long.

[Elgee]

Yeah the Reds are the most likely to Bond Asha'man, as their beatch of a Head told them they have to. And that balances out the Greens being allowed 3 or 4 Warders.

 

As to length of time: I'll just use my common sense, ie check that someone has made a thread at the Warders looking for one, it's been up for at least 2 weeks and no one has taken the bait. That way I can be flexible about it (longer if there if it's a low activity period, less if there are lots of active Warders).

 

Just to get it straight ... are you saying the Blues are allowed to bond 1 Warder + 1 Asha'man, but they must have 1 Warder before they can bond an Asha'man?

[SerenaMorrigan]

Yes, that's what I'm saying. Again, I would think there would have to be a good reason for the Blue to bond an Asha'man, and I also am a big fan of supporting the Warders Division. Like it was said earlier, I wouldn't want a bunch of people who joined that Division, wanting to be a Warder, get over-looked because all of the Aes Sedai want Asha'man now.

 

I can see Blue's bonding Asha'man depending on their Cause. Personally, I'd love to have Serena on the "wrong end" of the bond again, but that's just me. Looks like I'll have to find me a Warder before I do that, if I set these parameters in place.  ;)

 

Did I clear anything up?

[Elgee]

Yep *grins and goes to add that in*

 

Btw, we already have 2 Ajah Heads on the "wrong" side of the Bond: Zarinen (Red) and Jaydena (Green). I think we should stop there.

[SerenaMorrigan]

Oh, I thought that I read that there were too many Aes Sedai that held the Bond, and not the Asha'man. Oopsy.