Printable View
We’re certain to get enough Avatars in a stack to actively “join” a crusade, the point is that after that what do we do? Do we hire the Crusade forces for that stack and then divide them into several smaller stacks or do we keep it as one?
We certainly can’t have a stack of Avatars attacking London for example…who would carry the Siege ram?!? Lol
TC’s option to give every Avatar the trait is a good one and addresses an issue I was thinking of.
There will be no need for avatars to join the Crusade right now as Philippe has enough units to do it by himself.
What remains to determine is whether we should or not allow "teleportation" to Paris of those avatars wishing to join the Crusade or have them walk the way from their own position... This could lead to some OOC discontent as IC Philippe won't wait very long before going...
OOC, however, I'm prepared to go with any solution that satisfies those willing to join...
After much IC debate and an edge of the seat vote, we have an Edict that sets out how to organise the crusade. Since the King voted for this, why not just have him follow it? We congregate on Paris where OK organises us into stacks and then we march on London forming up in a single stack that includes all participating avatars for the assault. No need for consols - just a little patience.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edict 1.3
Sorry for my absence lately, guys. I've come down with a pretty bad case of the flue. :no:
I might be off a day or so. In the meantime TheFlax is authorized to settle any rules disputes. As far as the Crusade goes, I'm thinking Econ has it right. The edict does seem to lay out how to do things pretty well. I'm happy to give some kind of trait for all crusaders, although it should be fairly small, or the dread guys will be left behind (maybe extra dread for people who go about the crusade in a vicious way, executing prisoners and exterminating settlements).
The Edict from Econ is well worded and is based on IC voting.
It should be used.
With the Crusade and everything I did a little housekeeping of the Order of the Fleur de Lys.
With the last from Lemongate being the information that he'll probably withdraw I'm gonna park his avatar Eloi de Montferrat in Antwerp (or close to Antwerp should it interfer with Gaspard de Neufville (Ignoramus) staying governor). I don't know whether Emergency Sessions count to the two missed Council Sessions thing, so I would refrain from killing his avatar just yet.
Beskar hasn't voted in any Council Session, nor participated in the game or the Order as far as I'm aware. His avatar Loup de Gisor should be killed off at the next opportunity!
In support of Ituralde's comment, I will once again request that the two avatars in Rennes are removed from play.
One of them being Loup de Gisor! :beam:Quote:
Originally Posted by AussieGiant
By the way, if someone tells me how to do it and I get the proper authorization I'll try to do it the next time I have the save.
Geez, this term has been so boring and uneventful. :laugh4:
Nothing is happening nowhere. The AI really seems hell-bent on destroying itself!
Another Emergency Session anyone?! :laugh4:
Have-at them I say! we'll stop ourselves before we reach Moscow I'm sure....:laugh4:
Hmm... A land war in Asia sounds promising. :clown:
Bloody hell. It's pretty amusing actually.
We could have waited a turn and simply taken the AI moves in stride and saved ourselves a lot of talking. :egypt:
Oh, beautiful. Beautiful. :charge:
I'm getting a feeling this is going to be another long turn. Why break with tradition, right? :2thumbsup:
So the save will be open longer than 24 hours, I'll keep it open until things sort out.
For the sake of those who do not have immediate access to the save, could we make it an OOC rule that anybody that makes action upon the save posts a brief summary of his actions when posting the save back...
It would make things easier to those that access the save afterwards, knowing what was done before...
[EDIT] : And that means me as well...
SOT updated (in red for ease of picking out changes) and summary posted. :2thumbsup:
:egypt:
If you see lack of comments from me, it means Thomas marched halfway to nowhere particular and back again to keep from being ignorant.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tristan de Castelreng
If that even helps. :clown:
While we are discussing OOC rules, could we make it a convention not to use the quote function to dissect your opponent's arguments line by line when debating in character? I find it very immersion breaking - it's like reading an internet debate rather than participating in a medieval council. There's also a risk in encourges internet style point-scoring and picking on tangential indiscretions rather than laying out a full case or refuting the main thrust of your opponent. It can make the discussion look rather fragmented - especially when several posts have elapsed since what you are quoting and the debate may have moved on. I realise there is a problem that we are not on line at the same time, so it is hard to simulate real life cut and thrust but there are more elegant ways of doing it. For example, just paraphrase the opponents' argument or even quote it in text without using the quote function.
So, basically, I recommend we avoid an IC post using the quote function like this:
*****************
Indubitably, His Majesty has a good point.Quote:
Originally Posted by The King
There, your Majesty, you veer periously close to treason!Quote:
Originally Posted by The King
Quod erat demonstratum.Quote:
Originally Posted by The King
*****************
Instead, trying something like:
*****************
On the matter of His Majesty's culinary predisposition towards sausages, he is quite to be commended. However, I fear he may be going too far in professing a speech regard for the Teuton varieties. I wish His Majesty well on his journey.
*****************
I raise this now because IIRC no one has used quotes excessively in the Conseil recently, so it won't appear I am picking on anyone.
I do think the quote function is useful for representing written text in IC speech - for example, if you are reading an edict or a letter. As presumably, a transcript of Conseil debates are kept, it might on occasion be legitimate to use the quote function to clinically dissect a controversial statement. But at one point, it was starting to happen a little too often for my taste.
On econ's request, I try to always spoiler out anything I feel the need to respond to IC exactly, that way the flow of my statements can be read without break, but if they don't make sense you have a reference under the spoiler tag.
:egypt:
Econ, thanks for reminding me I haven't been to the Renaissance festival yet this year. :clown: Maryland has one of the best. Time's running out!
In regard to Philippe's push for an immediate Crusade I'm going to respond here now and in the Conseil a bit later.
The calling for the Crusade is where IC and OOC issues gets muddled together. I realize that in an absolute monarchy the King could call the Crusade and set off whenever he wanted. However as the person currently running the game, I've got an Edict with very specific parameters.
Now the King has the right to declare war whenever he wishes and campaign as he sees fit, but calling the Crusade and having eligible armies join it (8 or more units) is in the Seneschal's domain. Therefore, the Crusade will not be called until the conditions of the Edict have been met or I have a concensus on how to go forward from those involved.
As for using a Crusade on the Moors or Germans, again I have a passed Edict for a Crusade on England. If two Ducs or just the King feel strongly enough and want to change this, they can call for an Emergency Session to alter what has already been agreed upon. Hugues himself will not be pursuing this option.
This all might ruffle some feathers, but I am proceeding as best I can given the current edicts and game conditions.
OK that sounds spot on to me.
To see how drunk Hugues should be with his little drinking game, I just checked how many times the word "Crusade" was used between his last and second to last post. It turns out it was 28, not including "Crusader" or "crusading". He then of course said it 4 - 5 times himself. :barrel:
I fear his liver might not survive the term.
Also I second Tristan's request to have each person who takes the save post a summary of what they did. I find it very helpful as Seneschal.
Stick it to em OK :egypt:
@Econ, good point. I've never done it but it is certainly worth stating now.
I can see council sessions getting even more entertaining with the two characters we have in the King and heir.
Good work Tristan and Ramses :2thumbsup:
Would it be useful for the Seneschal for us to link battle reports and stories to our save retrospectively also?Quote:
Originally Posted by OverKnight
Doesn't the level of enebreation depend on what's being drunk? lol
Nah, just a short description will do. The rest I cover in the History.
28 gulps of wine could do some damage. I fear for the Kingdom if Hugues switches to Brandy.
Its the quantity and rate of consumption.Quote:
Originally Posted by Braden
One shot of spirits is equal to one 341ml of beer that is equal to 6 oz glass of wine. Alcohol is alcohol only body weight and empty or full stomach will affect the level of intoxication. :book:
So my £70-a-night binges when I was younger WERE a bad idea...:embarassed:
The save will be reclaimed in about three hours once I have finished watching the Patriots-Ravens game and I am fully caffeinated.
So if there are any last minute moves for this turn, now would be a good time to do them.
Edit: I think any idea that has the word "binge" in it, is usually a bad one. :laugh4: