thats gonna be a fun time...
Printable View
thats gonna be a fun time...
We might want to get some legislation in place that mandates that our avatars have to be out of settlements at that point. The game would get pointless if we all lost our avatars. Or at least some OOC agreement that even the Chancellor can't override seeing as that is a "survival of the game" issue. If people want their avatars to go into plague cities, thats their business, but we should be able to keep our whole family line alive if we stay out in the woods until the little rat disappears. At least thats what I've done in my SP games.Quote:
Originally Posted by AussieGiant
I agree with Stuperman, a mass rebellion might be fun, but not just yet. I think the game is interesting enough at the moment. TC's mechanics for a cataclysmic event sound fine.
The obvious thing to coincide a mass rebellion (which takes the form of disbanding garrisons) with is the plague, but that's in 1350 and we are only in 1260.
If people want it sooner, it could coincide with some in character dispute - like the Hummel impeachment or the Siegfried succession. But I would prefer to avoid player vs player battles - as I think they will mark the end of the game - so it might take some preparation and scripting to work out a good story. I can see one opportunity in a couple of months.
Finally, we could time it to coincide with the third wave of Mongols. This would not be an IC thing, but more an OOC one to increase the challenge. (The present second wave has been severely depleted).
This might be a good subject for an OOC poll.
OOC Poll: Choose one of the following:
1. Mass rebellion now (Siegfried succession).
2. Mass rebellion in two months time.
3. Mass rebellion when 3rd wave of Mongols arrives.
4. Mass rebellion coinciding with plague.
5. No mass rebellion.
Note: if voted for, a mass rebellion will be organised by Econ21 by disbanding all garrisons to one unit. Unit recruitment (including mercs) will be limited to ten per turn for 10 turns.
We could use the poll to see which is the most popular option of (1) to (5). If it is not (5), we could put the option forward as an OOC CA with a simple yes/no question requiring a 2/3 majority to pass.
Is there a third Mongol wave? In my sp games there are only two 4 stack waves that usually end up consolidating to one 8 stack line of horsey death. Every single time I have killed all 8 stacks, I have never seen another.
1350 is not really that far away. The Black Plague will occur less than 5 Chancellorship terms from now, which is equivalent to the time between the Crusade to take Jerusalem and the present. Maybe 2-3 months of play time.
Shortly after the Plague, we also get hit by the Timurids. I would say that would be the perfect time to engineer a revolt or other 'cataclysm.' Lump them all together into a period so utterly traumatic for the Reich that it drastically reduces our size and causes problems for decades afterwards. If we do that, we will then have more than enough stuff to keep us busy through the New World.
So, all we have to do is keep going until 1350. If we really decide to give the Reich a huge whack on the head at that point, I don't see any problems with resuming a slow expansion right now. For example, adding 2 settlements each Chancellorship Term until the Plague won't ruin the game as long as we don't kill off too many factions and so long as we then 'lose' those provinces and more when the 'bad years' come along.
FH has confirmed that the game mechanics have 3 of the little things horsey stacks lined up normally.
I think that for the next PBM we should consider using a mod. Right now I'm trying out Deus lo Vult and it looks perfect for the kind of PBM we want.
First of all it would provide or in-game factors for roleplaying, such as procincial ancillaries, famous swords, a career ladder for generals, choosing between general and governor when a character comes of age, and even a trait that signifies how closely related a character is to the original monarch.
It would also provide slower pacing, something that, from what I've heard, was also a problem in WOTS. This is accomplished by having 2 turns per year with 900 turns per game, adjusting the build time upward, and subtracting varying amount of money for each army in the field. Sieges, for example, cost an automatic 2000 florins per turn.
I urge everyone to give this mod a try and contribute your opinions, as it deserves serious consideration for whatever's planned after KOTR.
But I think it will seriously weaken the French and the Huns, probably the Poles too, with the 2 settlements per term case. Although I think you guys should really just send Igno's char back to Swabia. I think one of the reason Swabia was no able to expand the last few terms was basically the only defensive army there was control by Xdeathfire avatar, the only avatar left, and he can't go on the offensive with Paris under threat constantly.
ICly, I think some chars might be able the insinuate that the balck death was cause by the blood lust of the dread avatars? :P
We've got legislation on attacking provinces. I think 2 is too much 1 would be better I think.
A mass rebellion, together with the Timurids seem nice.
Barbarian Invasion, Migration and such.
We could do some small rebellion by Hummel and maybe Hans if Siegfried becomes Emperor (which seems to happen). Hummel can rebel the settlement he is currently in, and as a punishment he gets send back to Swabia.
I definately like this Idea, I've had enough of sick avatars. I conpletely forgot about the black death as well, I think it'd be interesting to see if we can survive the ensuing financial crunch, while the AI still has gobs of cash.Quote:
Originally Posted by Privateerkev
I also would like to see the new world learn to speak german, I realize that that wouldn't be for a while, but something I'd like to see none the less. I can see now the politics and debate over whether or not to to open up a port on the Atlantic, sounds like fun.
More immediately though, I think that a couple of Chancellorships of wealth and prospairity(sp) representing the Golden period of German history are a good Idea. Both IC and OOC I'd love to see the HRE peak having carved out all of central europe(what we've got plus Antwerp, burges, Naples, Palmero, Krakow and Hylatch for nice 'round' boarders) then lose a dozen of more territories under a particularly disasterous Chancellor or something (that'd be fun to RP too).
The problem is that normally we would impeach such a chancellor, so he should destroy the Reich, but with our allowance. So that he does what we want, but has some sneaky plan behind our backs.
We might lose a city as Paris, as it still is very French. Same with Bran (if the Edict gets through) and parts of the Outremer (as that is not really German at all).
And I think that in that case we cheat some more units for the rebels, so they are stronger.
My 2 province suggestion was just an idea to appease those who wanted more offensive battles. I agree that we can do just fine without adding more provinces. There is also plenty of room to conquer a province and then abandon it or sell it off. We've already done this with Sofia and Iconium and we're about to do it with Moscow. I wouldn't have any problems doing it with Cagliari either, since conquest of that island will likely be authorized this term. Edicts wouldn't even be needed for that, since all new conquests become Imperial property, so the Kaiser (if he were on board with the plan) could instantly require that they then be abandoned/sold off. They're his property, so he can do whatever he wants with them.
As for blaming the Chancellor who is reigning during the 'catastrophe,' well, we can implement the event via OOC edict and include a clause stating that it is to be considered an "Act of God" and not the direct fault of the Chancellor. Though of course the Chancellor (and all future Chancellors) can be held responsible for not responding to the crisis in an adequate manner. Think Hurricane Katrina. No (sane) people blame Bush for the actual hurricane itself, but he was heavily criticized for perceived failures in his response to the disaster.
A problem with having the territories revolt during the Black Death is that I have found that the plague ends up helping me with civil order in SP games. The Black Death kills tons of people but leaves "happiness" buildings intact. This basically makes every city a severely depleted, but happy one.
Then do the revolt in 1340. HRE loses several territories in 1340, 5 turns later the black plague hits, 5 to 10 turns after the plague, the Timurids arrive. Fun for all.
I would agree to that. I think it would be great fun! :yes:Quote:
Originally Posted by TinCow
Discussion about cataclysmic event sounds good.
I think that eventually we should gear up for a major showdown with Spain. They look to be nearly as powerful as Iberia in the old WotS and will be our only real accomplishment, especially if we shoot ourselves in the foot. Two ideas have presented themselves:
- Launch an invasion prior to the Discovery of America. Duke it out in the heart of enemy territory, and set up a good series of ports to use to sail the Atlantic.
- Fight them in the New World. Three-way slugfest between us, them, and the Aztecs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeneralHankerchief
I like the Idea of a war in the new world that spills over to Europe (reverse history?), It will give spain that much more time to Expand as well. Making thier eventual conquest that much more Glorious!!! gosh I'm a nerd sometimes
How about we become anti-gunpowder. The chivalrous characters can be against it on principle, and a few others can decide that their character had an unpleasant expereience (I'm thinking missing hands here), and then pass legislation forbidding gunpowder development. And then after a while we can take on Spain...
Sounds fun FLYdude, ofcourse the Dread guys (if we get some new ones, I bet so) should ofcourse like it, dividing the Reich.
Also for Spain, if we want a major showdown, how about giving them more money than other factions, that makes sure they will gain loads of territory.
hmm... maybe give the gun powder units only to the dread generals? I noticed that quite a few of the counts has already started the commissioning of the building of gunsmith for the next term... might be abit hard to justify them banning the use of those troops?
Or will it involve the demolition of said buildings and disbanding those units once the legistration is passed. I remember reading somewhere some players were looking forward to playing with gunpowder units
Those will be the big, clumsy always failing siege guns.Quote:
hmm... maybe give the gun powder units only to the dread generals? I noticed that quite a few of the counts has already started the commissioning of the building of gunsmith for the next term... might be abit hard to justify them banning the use of those troops?
How about making a story about them being dangerous and killing our own men, after which some generals don't want them anymore?
Anti-gunpowder can be easily (and effectively) developed IC. Find a few like-minded Electors and start making plans.
One problem with that though, don't a lot of people (Chiv and Dread) have that "Fan of technology" trait? That's pretty hard to RP around.
I haven't really spotted anyone with that. So there are enough without it.
Maybe we can RP some group of people coming to power (as Lothar's secret society ~D) and they will back up eachother so everything goes their way. That can easely explain a rebellion. They always get the chancellor, they are numerous enough to stop most edicts they don't like. Only way to stop them will will be rebellion.
All these suggestions, good ideas many, wouldn't be implemented in this next term would they? If we're going to OOC manipulate the game in a major way, I think the poor bastards running for the Chancellorship should know what they're getting into.
So if we want to plan so major uprisings or such for 1280, we should have that voted on and in place before the next election.
Nah, we should prepare for this OOC, not just introduce them. As we said, it should come around 1350.
Hmm, going through the Library there aren't as many as I thought.
Two of the Steffins, Gerhard and Lothar, as well as Friedrich Scherer, have "Admires Technology." So no real conflict there.
Fredricus von Hamburg has "Questions Technology." Again, no real conflict but it doesn't matter anyway since he's going to buy the farm very soon.
Jens Hummel (the unassigned one) also has "Questions Technology." Could be a minor problem considering his dreaded relatives.
I know that gerhard has "admires technology", and OK I really don't think that any of this is going to be implemented till at least 1280, probably later.
p.s. I'm glad you'll get one more update of your AAR in.
Stig, that cracked me up! :laugh4:Quote:
Originally Posted by Ansehelm
*edit*
As for being anti-gunpowder, can't we already build Reiters? Or was that only in Sofia?
We musn't get rid of Reiters; they are one of the most interesting and best units in the game. They are basically the only unit which uses pistols, and thus add variety to the domination of arquebuses and muskets.
If CA 11.6 passes I'm thinking the King of Outremer will have a role similar to that of a US Supreme Court Justice.
The mechanics we can do IC should be a first prioirty.
The idea of the plague plus all the money we give the AI will make that event far more impactful.
The gunpowder thing also is entirely able to be done IC...and a very good idea.
:laugh4:
Oh my god! Is everyone voting for everything!?! I think I have committed my character to every piece of legislation but one! Is everyone else in the same boat? Are we going to see almost every edict and CA pass unanimously? Is every election like this? I am highly amused... :yes:
Nah Ansehelm won't vote in favour of everything, but most will get a yes.
And I can't believe some are actually against CA 11.4, it makes the most sense of all proposed Edicts and CA's
It makes the most sense to exactly 4 people. It makes little sense to those who are neither Dukes nor Crusader Counts. And it makes zero sense to those that are Crusader Counts.
No it does make sense to anyone, Dukes are above Counts, fact.
That should make sense, even if you don't agree with it
Dukes still retain the right to give and take away counties. This gives them powers of compulsion that Crusader Counts do not have and allows them to organize voting blocs. Plus, if you take away Crusader Count influence, you take away the King's power of compulsion. Sure, they could get Crusader Count if they had no county in Europe but what if a Crusader came and had a county in Europe? The King would have no power to compel that Crusader at all. There is more to power in this game than mere influence points. I have seen, and experienced, that Dukes are very powerful and it does not have everything to do with influence points.
Actually, the bill that makes the most sense is CA 11.2
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ignoramus
You know, I've been doing some thinking about this, and there is a way to send Hummel home faster. When we make the Crusade stack, we put Hummel in it. Then we take him and only him out. We stick him on a boat and he will have a turn or two of "super duper Crusade speed" on a boat which will take him a good distance across the Med. He won't suffer desertion because he is a General Bodyguard unit. Meanwhile the Crusade goes to Jerusalem and everyone's happy. :book:
*edit*
He'll even get the Chivalry bonus for joining the Crusade. Ironic since he'd essentially be lying about joining a religious mission and then running in the opposite direction.
I often vote against things I might agree with in order to give the Chancellor discretion. The standard for me is not whether it is a good idea, but whether it is such a good idea that it is necessary to force the Chancellor to do it. It's a bit like the States' rights arguments in the US (should the federal government decide an issue for a state?).Quote:
Originally Posted by Privateerkev
Bottom line is Crusade counts have the same voting power as a Duke.
While there are other areas of benefit for a Duke this one should not be equal in my view...and keep in mind gentlemen it's not the people who are dukes...it's an office that many others will hold as men die and other replace them.
There are 4 current dukes and then 4 future dukes up next and the another 4 behind them, those of you looking for a Ducal heir appointment need to keep that in mind. For those of you with good relations to Duke or future dukes, you need to keep that in mind....see :2thumbsup:
For those not directly affected then its a simple readjustment of something that was not intended to be that way and the basic set up should be re-balanced.
Hell, Arnold might have to go on crusade...as long as the Kaiser is happy them he'd be off...now who would want that :balloon2:
You know what I just realized? I forgot to propose an edict allowing Swabia to take Caen...sigh
Also, I will be on vacation until next Saturday so I will appoint Factionheir as my steward. Anyone can fight my battles, but please dont get me killed
I've returned a mere 30 minutes ago, and will need a bit of time to read my PM's and read through the threads as I'm not in a fit enough state to do so at the moment - having just returned.
An official statement of my return IC will be made, and I shall try to reply to all of my KotR PM's IC or OOC as soon as possible.
Just to let you all know.
:balloon2:
I know I proposed CA 11.4 IC, but I also feel strongly OOC about it. The feudal hierarchy structure of this game is one of the things that has really made it enjoyable. Advancement from elector to count to duke to emperor (for some lucky few) is an amazing progression. However, Dukes are vastly underpowered now due to the Outremer legislation. If you think back (and read the legislation itself) you'll see that Outremer was never intended to be another House. It's just a way of managing an area that is a good distance away from the rest of the Reich. The +1 for Crusader Counts was supposed to be seen as a reward for those who sacrificed and left the Reich. However, it hasn't worked out that way. What has happened is that Outremer is the BEST place to be and everyone left behind is diminished. This has in effect turned Outremer into the Fifth House, something that the legislation specifically stated it shouldn't be.
So, CA 11.4 will rebalance this and it will also make sure that people only go East for IC reasons. This is how it should be IMO. Outremer should be the place that is always in need of more generals, not the Duchies. If you believe that Outremer needs more power than it has under CA 11.4, propose new legislation about the powers and influence of the King at the next session. He should be the focus of Outremer power and influence, since he is essentially removed from his house. Strengthen the King and you strengthen Outremer. Don't do it via the Crusader Counts.
Aye, if CA 11.4 doesn't get through I suggest we discuss it OOC. Afterall I believe these rules were made OOC not IC.
Ironically now that the benefits have so eloquently been exposed and are aware to everyone, it seems as if it is too difficult NOT to go out there at some stage of someone IC life.
That fact I admitted to the urge as Arnold seems to be clear to me now...a few posts ago I could not have told you why exactly. Now I can.
The fact the original wording specifically say that it is not a house and should never be was shocking enough to me once I re-read it.
Please note guy's I'm very conscious of the fact that we are talking about position not the individuals that currently hold them.
Please keep that in mind when thinking about this.
The whole idea of even wanting to be a Duke...which some months ago was a very desirable position seems to have been diluted.
OOC I strongly believe that Outremer should be gutted of influence but IC I believe the opposite. What amuses me so much is that people have basically created a monster. This mirrors other real life political situations in history. What we are experiencing is something like the real feudal states experienced when they saw the Templars getting too powerful. TC could have proposed legislation that left everything the same but gave the Duke +4 influence and raised the cap. That would have gone for the balance he wanted and it might have even passed. But, raising the Duke while lowering the Count showed that it was an IC attempt to gut Outremer. While OOC I can see the merit of that, that will be very hard to convince enough people of IC. Giving the extra Crusader Count influence that can be tacked onto Count influence makes Outremer one of the places to go for career advancement. And we do need many good people out there for the enemies are numerous and respawning.
Same in Europe, that's a bad excuseQuote:
And we do need many good people out there for the enemies are numerous and respawning.
I think one of the issues that has happen PK is that initially there were only a few Crusader Counts. Now it's as if all of a sudden we've seen the 900lb gorilla in the corner and there's load of them. :laugh4:
We'll see what happens with the voting though.
There's been more than a few surprises over the months.
Yup I think that's it.Quote:
there were only a few Crusader Counts.
People start seeing the Outremer as their house, for which they use their influence. While that influence was meant as a bonus for 5 persons or so. Not for loads.
It's a simple fact that Dukes are more important than Counts, as they give Countships, now the a Count can overrule a Duke
I think it was inevitable that Outremer become a fifth house. They way it was structured it already was a fifth house in all but name. It's geographically distinct, the nobles there have their own seperate concerns, and it has a leader with the rank of King, no less.
Still it has no own family, it cannot become a house of it's own as people will have to leave houses for it
Well given players would swear allegiance to their Duke, you could pass legislation that means a Duke has to give permission for one of his nobles to go out east.
Problem is right now the east could vote it down.
Given fealty is one of the foundations of the whole system we seem to have shot ourselves in the foot.:balloon2:
Still, it's was a tricky thing in real life and I think we've simulated that nicely :laugh4:
Whats funny is that both of you are trying to convince me OOC of something I strongly believe in OOC. Just good luck convincing me IC. :laugh4:
Outremer is a perfect example of good intentions having unexpected consequences. It is the 800 lb gorilla in the room that no one wants to acknowledge. Besides giving extra influence, it is simply a fun place to be. With other parts of the map, you pretty much have to make up your own quest and identity. The Crusade mechanic in the game provides a ready made identity, quest, and built in reward system. Its something to do when you get sick of moving a stack of troops around European forests fighting stacks of enemy troops.
There is a limit as to how many Crusader Counts there can be though. There can only be 5 and 1 King. Its not like there are a dozen. The King can not hand out more CC's than there are territories and there can only be 6 territories by current law. Every house gets one territory and one CC. The King gets one. And the last is a rotating one where it goes from house to house. Swabia had the extra territory but now it is Franconia's turn.
This is something we will all have to struggle with but I urge that it be done IC. For it provides for some great RP'ing. I think an IC attempt to gut the Crusaders, like what happened to the Templars but without the death part, would be awesome.
Trying to vote on it OOC is like trying to have Chancellor elections OOC.
I fully agree. It's in your IC interest to vote against it. The Dukes should be the ones putting IC pressure on the Crusader Counts from their House to vote for the Amendment. For instance: vote for it or lose your County.Quote:
Originally Posted by Privateerkev
I'm a freehold Count, so I can do whatever I want!
Ahh, the politics of it all....I've not said that in so many words.
Unfortunately for GH, Conrad Salier is not. :laugh4: Though he's got a while yet before he has to deal with Duke Lothar.Quote:
Originally Posted by gibsonsg91921
Jan doesn't have a county. :laugh4:Quote:
Originally Posted by TinCow
One of the many reasons Ansehelm is having a difficult time with Jan. The PM's where Ansehelm was trying to convince Jan to vote for CA 11.4 were priceless.
:beam:
God, all of this RPing as a goody-two-shoes makes me sick. :laugh4:
Yeah, if I get much more piety and chivalry I will get into that myself. I still have traits which allow me to be basically good but they are low enough to allow myself some moral flexibility. :laugh4:
Well, you could always become a religious fanatic like Max. That's just an evil with a glossy finish. I swear that somehow I will find a way to be an ally of yours eventually, in the next game if not in KOTR. Our trend of creating characters that are totally incompatible is mind-bogglingly consistent. I still hold out hope that one day I will get my hands on an insane avatar.Quote:
Originally Posted by GeneralHankerchief
Charter Amendment Aardvark: All generals must begin their battles facing backwards and must run at least three counterclockwise loops around the enemy before engaging in combat.
Yes you're make me barf GH.
You're so nice it's excruciating. :laugh4:
I'm sure you want to swap and be dread hey!!
I wish there was a way to vote on some stuff right now and then vote on other stuff later. I am waffling on one piece of legislation and it has nothing to do with any IC promise. Hope I'm not making anyone bite their nails OOC but it would be funny if they were IC.
Not when Gunther dies you are ~DQuote:
Originally Posted by gibsonsg91921
And he'll have a hard time getting one if he goes on like thisQuote:
Originally Posted by PrivateerKev
Well, if CA 11.4 passes, Jan will have even less reason to listen to Ansehelm. Since Jan would already have the one county he is allowed by being a Crusader Count, there would be zero ambition to have one in Europe. Other Crusaders would have to make a choice though since they hold both kinds.
Also, does this mean the King loses his King influence no matter what? He gets to be a count but he can't be a Crusader Count (because he is the King) and the legislation leaves no wording saying what influence a King gets.
Well, the King has been getting the +1 Crusader Count bonus since the position began, so I assume he will keep it. It isn't spelled out specifically, though, so there is room for argument/exploitation.
Well, I actually can not find anywhere in the original Outremer charter that specifically gives the King +1. It is in the Chancellor report thread but not the rules in the OOC thread. Maybe econ would like to throw in a small rule clarification that says "for purpose of influence, King of Outremer = Crusader Count". That would clear that up.
I guess it's too late to throw an OOC clarification in.
Any objections?
Well, I would like a clarification as to how much influence King Salier actually gets. Currently, he gets +1 for being a King even though I can not find it explicitly stated in the rules and he gets +1 for being a count.
If we go by the "spirit of the law" then he is by law a Crusader Count for purposes of influence since it is the only thing in the actual rules that bestows that on him.
If CA 11.4 passes, it puts the King in an interesting spot. If he is, in spirit, a Crusader Count, then the section of CA 11.4 that states, "They will gain +1 influence, but only if they are not already a Count in their Duchy," means that the King would automatically lose his Bavarian province. Unless he resigns immediately. If he is not, in spirit, a Crusader Count, then he shouldn't even have the +1 influence for being King and he gets to keep the +1 for being a count. Either way it seems like he is losing 1 influence but we do not seem to know from where.
Also, I find it interesting that the people pushing for this are using the argument that a Duke should have more influence than a Count but this legislation makes it almost impossible for a King to have more influence than his Crusaders. Even more ironic, is the fact that CA 11.4 makes Outremer more like a duchy while simultaneously hobbling the "Duke's" influence. First let me state why the King almost can't have more influence than his Crusaders and then I will address how CA 11.4 makes Outremer more of a Duchy. The only way the King can have more influence than his Crusaders, is if he is a chancellor, ex-chancellor, prince and all of his crusaders are none of those.
We OOC and IC keep stating that Outremer is not a Duchy but we are about to make it more like one. We already have in place a system where the King can bestow land upon his crusaders much like a Duke does. And the King is regarded as a Duke for purposes of army command. CA 11.4 will further give ducal power by:
(a). Allowing the King to have "house" edicts.
(b). Giving the option for Crusaders to essentially leave their own house by forcing them to abandon their lands in Europe if they want to have land in Outremer.
I would personally prefer to find a way for the King to keep a +1 influence for being King and a +1 influence for being a count. Either that or give the King +2 influence and make him renounce his county.
These are just my thoughts. Any suggestions? :book:
I think you're totally off-base with your interpretation. CA 11.4 in no way requires a Crusader Count to relinquish any of their Duchy lands. It simply says you only get a +1 for being a Crusader Count if you're not already a Count in your Duchy. At the moment, that actually only applies to you (Jan von Hamburg). No one is required to relinquish anything, it simply prevents people from doubling up on Count and Crusader Count influence. Also, you say the King gets 'house' edicts from 11.4, which is totally false. He gets personal edicts, which are very different. The whole reason to put them in there is because it has been pointed out that the King doesn't actually have access to any House edicts of any kind, because he is forced to leave his Duchy. This means that without CA 11.4, the King only has access to 1 Edict proposal each Diet, which is a huge disadvantage. CA 11.4 is correcting that by giving him 2 more personal edicts.
Again, your statements that Crusaders have to abandon their lands in Europe is totally false.
Then I apologize that I read CA 11.4 wrong. Effectively my argument remains largely untouched. While Crusaders get to keep their land in Europe, they get no influence from it. So, again they can pretty much abandon their house for as long as they are a Crusader Count. And the edicts might be the King's but they still effectively act as "house" edicts while not being called "house" edicts. We have still effectively made Outremer more like a duchy while not calling it one. This is all fine with me but it is ironic because some of the same people who pushed for this have stated that Outremer should be less like a duchy.
So, the King is a King and not a Crusader Count? That means Conrad gets to keep both influence points because that part of CA 11.4 will not effect him? Sounds good to me if everyone else is cool with it. Though ideally we should figure out a OOC or IC rule change eventually to cover this.
I don't see any possible way you could interpret the rules to say that. If the King is a Crusader Count and the 'leaving his House' clause doesn't strip him of his Bavarian County, he does not get a Crusader Count +1 because he has a Bavarian County. If he is a Crusader Count and is stripped of his Bavarian County by the 'leaving his House' clause, he gets +1 for being a Crusader Count. If he is not a Crusader Count, but doesn't lose his Bavarian County, he gets +1 for being a Bavarian Count. if he is not a Crusader Count AND loses his Bavarian County, he get nothing whatsoever.
How can he possibly get +2?
My point is, in my opinion, he should have +2. People want Dukes to have more influence than their counts but the King should have equal or less influence than his Crusaders?
I guess my big question is, exactly what clause in what rule gives King Salier +1 influence for being King of Outremer and is that clause still active if CA 11.4 is voted on?
The only thing that can give the King a +1 for anything is the part of the Outremer law that gives all Crusader Counts +1. The question is whether the King is a Crusader Count, something which is not spelled out in the Diet and therefore subject to interpretation. Therefore I believe it is up to the Kaiser to determine if the King gets +1 or +0. It seems obvious that at the moment he will be given +1. If you think the King needs more than +1, that should be proposed in an Amendment at the next Diet because, as I said above, there is no way to interpret the law as giving him that if 11.4 passes. Hell, even if 11.4 doesn't pass, it actually looks like the King gets +1 and all all Crusader Counts get +2, because the King loses his Bavarian +1 because he has to leave his House.
For the record, Salier should also probably lose the right to post build queues for Nuremburg. If he's not in Bavaria, he can't be Count of Nuremburg, so he can't govern it.
Yeah, that is definitely my interpretation of the letter of the law. I guess we have been playing with a "spirit of the law" that has been allowing him to have both. I guess amending the Outremer charter made me take a good hard look at the charter. And while I want the King to have a +1 King bonus, I could not find anything in the charter that gives it to him. And since we're amending the charter, I want to be clear on what it did say and what it will say when the CA passes.
Your points about the Kaiser giving the King +1 and the King losing his county due to being out of the house are very good ones. Its just that we have kept playing with the King having +2 while ignoring part of the charter.
So, if CA 11.4 passes, is Conrad losing 1 influence because:
(a) He can only get influence from either being a count or a crusader count, but not both.
or,
(b) He has never had a county the entire time he has been King but we have ignored that part of the charter.
If the CA does not pass, how much influence does Conrad have and does he have a Bavarian county?
If the CA does pass, how much influence does Conrad have and does he have a Bavarian county?
So, is this a case of the CA taking influence away from him or is it a case of us finally following something that has been in the charter the whole time?
PS: I am really digging this legal discussion! :book:
I must say CA 11.8 is going to remove half the role playing ability of any future avatar.
That's pretty difficult to swallow.
Plus...just how are people going to prevent me from executing prisoners in the actual game before I hand the save back...and believe me someone better have that concept line up because I gently stated the enforcement quesiton in the Diet.
I figured we would just simply follow the rule. If the rule says hit the release button instead of the ransom or execute button, thats what you do. Its the same with loading FH's mod onto our computer, load only 2 units per boat, gift the AI or any other rule. Its a game mechanic. You can RP being mad about it as a character but I assume we would just follow the mechanic as players. I guess we can ask Econ what he wants to do should it pass. And that is assuming it will pass. It still has some hurdles to jump through.
Any other ideas?
I don't think it will affect roleyplaying at all. At least, I'm sure that if it does pass we'll hear no shortage of complaints throughout the term. Besides which, you can even try to get it repealed during the next session, something that will also provide more avenues for roleplaying.
Cecil, the dread traits are directly related to killing prisioners, which directly affect retinue, names of characters and other traits.
If you release all prisioners everytime, you'll get a house full of squeaky clean GQ men pracing around telling the world their wonderful...:dizzy2:
IC enforecement needs to be addressed PK. While I agree that the rules are the rules, in this case IC Arnold's going to want to break the rules...what going to happen then?
It's getting even more exciting.:2thumbsup: