Printable View
My sympathies on your situation Tristan.
I'm personally glad things have slowed a bit, I really need to catch up on stuff for the game but life has been absurdly busy and I'm still putting that personal nastiness from a month ago behind my family. Prince Louis does have a vested interest in the way things are going (FOr one I'm going to write a will!) but it may be a bit before he can comment officially.
:egypt:
Considering that I may just write my will and leave everything to the King…that way I don’t get any daggers in the back!
…either that or leave everything to “an random” noble…:laugh4:
The way I understood it from the curren Rules is that any avatar that has not joined a House/Duchy is independent.Quote:
Originally Posted by Braden
So this would be c) in this case. Just because you have a vassal does not make you part of a House. That has to come with a Codex Amendment. So only Houses/Duchies have special rights, i.e. the right to retain their provinces even when the Duke dies.
You seem to put a lot of emphasis on the land owning issue. Your definition of a feudal chain seems to be only people that have a province in the game. I always thought that any noble who swears an Oath belongs to a feudal chain, regardless of land ownership. And that's the way I read the rules right now. Your Amendment would shift that focus towards land owning nobles. We could get there easier if we just redefine the term feudal chain to only contain land owning nobles, if that is what we want.Quote:
2 – Proposed Amended wording to Rule 39(d):
(d) - Wills & Inheritance: Upon the death of a noble his land and/or Duchy goes to the Avatar(s) specified in his valid Will. A will is valid only if posted on the relating Dukes SoT entry prior to his IC death. Inheritance of Land is separate from Succession of Title and each will, should contain two clauses to cover both land and title. Hence, it is possible for a Duke to specify one Avatar to inherit his land holdings but a different one to become his Successor in Title. Also note that a Duke can nominate ANY avatar and they need not be only those within their own Feudal Chain, including the King.
Land Inheritance without a valid will: Upon the death of a noble who has no valid will (either none posted on his SoT’s or one that has become invalid due to death of relating avatars), his lands pass to the highest ranked Count or Baron within his Feudal Chain.
Title Succession without a valid will: Upon the death of a noble who has no valid will (either none posted on his SoT’s or one that has become invalid due to death of relating avatars), the King picks the successor from among the Nobles in the Duchy Feudal Chain.
3 – Proposed Additional sub-clause (g):
(g) Default Inheritance Rule: Upon the death of a noble, if a Duke is independent (as decided with above addition #1) and has no valid will (either none posted on his SoT’s or one that has become invalid due to death of relating avatars), all Lands and Titles immediately go into the King.
**I have amended this to detach the Kings involvement and to make it clearer that the King is the person land goes to by DEFAULT if there isn’t a Count or Baron within the Duchy Feudal chain for it to go to. I have also specified that there is a difference between inheriting land and being the Successor of the Duchy. Land inheritance is via the Duchy Feudal Chain automatically but the Successor of the Duchy itself is still decided by the King from the Duchy Feudal Chain, hence the two could be differing Avatars though in practice this would be unlikely.**
Also do I read your Amendment correctly in that the King can become Duke? This goes against the penalties described in 3.f) where it says that any rulings within 3.f) supercedes other rules. So even if the Amendment passed it still wouldn't work and shouldn't actually. The Kings the King and can not be Duke. There's several pieces in the rules that refer to this.
Personally I don't think a Rule Amendment is necessary. We just need to decide on the two things:
A) What is an independent avatar?
You already covered that.
B) What is a feudal chain?
A and B are in a feudal chain if:
a) A is a vassal of B. A and B are Members of the same House and A and B own land.
b) A is a vassal of B. A and B are Members of the same House.
c) A is a vassal of B.
I always thought that b) was the case. a) is nice to have but not necessary. c) is not enough as you need a House.
After that we should get along fine with the rules we have.
Thinking I've over-thought it to be honest.
In my first proposal I agree that a), b) or c) could be applicable to greater or lesser extents as "independant".
I was trying to seperate Land ownership from the actual titles held...such as Baron, Duc or Count. I thought that it might make things more interesting and flexible for the players.
However I totally agree that a Vassal is as much a part of the Feudal Chain as the others although without specific title or land. I didn't mention vassals specifically as they are effectively the final link in the chain...with perhaps the exception of relatives by blood or marriage (and then its getting quite complex indeed).
The intention is they are included in the phrase but if you didn't think so then I've failed to pose that correctly.
The King cannot become a "Duc" in title, he is always the King but he can obtain a Duc's full lands if the Duc has no other to leave them too or chooses to leave them to the King in his will. Again, I mush have rushed this at work more than I wanted.
The first thing is the key however and that's what needs to be decided mainly. My amendment was just a thought but I may have gone "off on one" with that. :laugh4:
...aaannnd I've just realised I don't know how to post polls on these forums. Feel free to do this in my stead if you can as I've run out of thinking time tonight...gah!
1 – The Definition of a “independent land owning Noble” is:
a) An Avatar with ownership of one or more provinces but who is without vassals AND does not have a ratified Duchy.
b) An Avatar with ownership of one or more provinces but who is without vassals with a ratified Duchy.
c) An Avatar with ownership of one or more provinces, with vassals but does not have a ratified Duchy.
d) An Avatar with ownership of one or more provinces, with vassals AND has a ratified Duchy.
Not to hold up the game however, I believe that we have now Role Played our way round this to an extent (between Trist, myself and Ibn in the Council thread so after a final nod from Ibn we could continue the game whilst this is decided for the next eventuality (as they're sure to be some).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Braden
Poll created.
Thanks for that NN to say I couldn't work it out myself last night and I run my own forums is a bit embarassing. :embarassed:
Found/thought of something that makes this a bit easier..if we agree to this we don’t need to hold things up too long:
From the Rules - “Any province conquered and ratified becomes part of the King's Demesne”
– this is the default procedure and counts until the King actively grants a territory to a Duchy or Individual Avatar.
So “independent” as stated in the rules seems to logically apply to a “Land Owning Avatar, without a Feudal Chain”.
I take “Feudal Chain” to mean – Duke > Count > Baron > Vassal. This is the normal chain of Feudal responsibility within a Duchy and the “Feudal Chain” as stated would refer to the Duchy Feudal Chain in this instance I believe.
I do not include the King in this as it states in the rules that the King (from the Rules again) “Cannot hold any other feudal rank except that of Chancellor”.
Of course, ultimately this could mean that a Vassal has the potential to become a Duke in one turn if the House is unlucky enough to loose all its Barons and Counts that turn…but then, that’s one of the advantages of pledging fealty isn’t it?
IF the Duchy has no surviving members of its Feudal Chain then THAT is an Independent Duchy and those lands would go automatically to the King if no will stating otherwise existed.
Ok…I’ve just posted IC. I found the statement the King made fully granting Staufen to the Duchy of Lorraine.
I really think we can put this to bed now doesn’t everyone else? General consensus is that the term “independent” would not apply to the Duchy of Lorraine at the time of the death of Thomas.
And as the other argument the King gave was about Staufen being within the Kings Demesne is also invalid I believe we can just move on with the save I last posted.
Sorry to nitpick again, but where do you take the Land Owning part from?Quote:
Originally Posted by Braden
Independent is any avatar that is not in a feudal chain, land is once again irrelevant.
Sorry if I come across a little tight about this, I just want us to all be on the same page OOC.
No, yes your correct.
"Independent" would mean an Avatar..with or without land..but without a Ratified Duchy (or a member thereof)?
Just to keep you posted...things have quietened down... Though not out of the hospital yet (and maybe not for some time), my relative's health is improving so I will surely have time today to adavnce the save.
Without word from Zim, I'll be going forward from Braden's save and may God save us all :clown:
Glad to here there’s steady improvement Trist, my wishes go with you and your family.
As to the save…this is going to be interesting isn’t it. I still can’t see the IC problems going forward but I guess that’s all with Charles now?
With the save on a bit of a hiatus, I guess this is a good time to ask: what's the best course of action when my interaction with the save is limited to a single move of a single character? PM the Seneschal with the move order? Update the status thread? Post it in the OOC thread?
Hi all,
First of all, much apologies for my extended absence. :embarassed: With my Gameroom commitments no longer entangling me and with the swine flu no longer kicking my butt, I figured that now would be a good time to get back into the swing of things here. I'll take some time out to catch up on all the threads, but if anybody could give me a quick summary of events it would be much appreciated. :yes:
BTW, glad to see some new (and old) faces.
Tamur – Any of the options you’ve stated. Often it takes more time to upload the new save, post you’ve taken it, unzip it into your PC, run the game than it is to actually conduct your move!
Largely it’ll depend on what you want to do. The Status thread can only really be used if you PM who has the Seneschal to instruct them what you want to do or join something like the Order where the Captain can make all the moves for you. I keep with the long winded method of uploading even for just a simple move myself but it depends on personal time etc.
GH!! – Awesome to have you back! As for an update…geez..where do I start?!? Hmmm…
At war with: England, HRE, Denmark and the Moors.
Just about beaten England though who has only two regions left. Moors are being pushed out of Iberia. We’ve retreated from the HRE forces as they were significantly boosted by GM intervention.
Two of the Royal Princes (Henri & Charles) have phished Daddy off over an adoption and a land exchange deal and are now fighting the resurgent HRE outside Frankfurt.
The King has used his veto’s to negate all the last sessions Edicts AND to elect himself Seneschal.
The economy is good but really only due to Louis constantly capturing and ransoming faction leaders in battle.
And no Crusade has happened anywhere!
The King is holding on to England all by himself, but has offered Britanny a share. There was no official response.
I'll be taking the save tonite so let me know what moves you intend and I'll be sure to make them for you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tamur
... And thanks to some very advantageous realty sales by the King :clown:Quote:
Originally Posted by Braden
Oh gosh yeah! lol....taking settlements and selling them back for extra profit is a mainstay of some TW games. :laugh4:Quote:
Originally Posted by Tristan de Castelreng
Tamur, Bart has been moved as per your orders.
I've PMed Ramses and I'll give him the 48 hours window to make a decision on whether or not he wants to fight and do it. After that, I'll withdraw his army from the battle and finish the turn.
You must autoresolve that battle. You can't withdraw his army.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tristan de Castelreng
Quote:
(c). - Battles: A player whose avatar leads an army that is involved in a battle will be expected to fight that battle. This will involve downloading the savegame of the battle, playing it and then uploading the resulting savegame. Uploading the post-battle save must be done within 48 hours of the pre-battle savegame being uploaded. If the deadline expires, the battle is autoresolved. If a player cannot fight a battle that is assigned to them, the battle may also be fought by any player whose avatar will also be present in the battle. Under no circumstances will a battle be fought by a player whose avatar is not present in the battle. If there is no player available to fight a battle, it must be autoresolved. If there are no allocated avatars involved in the battle at all, it must be autoresolved.
I don't see why not. Moreover, there are other avatars in the stack so those could fihgt the battle in Ramses' stead.
And in keeping with previous games, IIRC, withdrawal was always an option if the player wasn't available. though if he can't withdraw far enough, I'll be forced to autoresolve. Anyway, I'm sure Ramses will be catch the save...
Someone wants their big bro dead so they can be crown prince :eyebrows:Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibn-Khaldun
I'd be very surprised if Ramses misses the deadline myself (48hrs is a long time), besides as Trist said there's a few active Avatars in that stack who can fight the battle in his stead.
Guess we might just be a bit impatient after such a long hiatus. :clown:
Same feeling here, though it is partly my fault... I'm happy to get back to the game and change my mind...Quote:
Originally Posted by Braden
:laugh4:..hey, you added RP, can't say better than that. It not working out for the King just adds even more! He's got the :wall: syndrom nowQuote:
Originally Posted by Tristan de Castelreng
Lol.. He is becoming a French version of Vlad Tepes.:laugh4:Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramses II CP
Judging from Ramses latest report defensive battles seem to be bugged. Did anyone who had to fight a defensive battle NOT have issues afterwards with the captives? Or the bug where missile units always use flaming arrows?
I don't think there's anything we can do about it and I don't think it's serious enough to detract from our game, but it would still be good to know, so you can anticipate what happens in defensive battles.
I've lined the road to Cordoba with Moorish dead so far, that's for sure, but they seem to have pretty substantial forces in Iberia still. This battle was a horrible joke on the AI, not only did I have more missile troops (Despite having very few of my own) I started on top of a spectacular hill with a lot of cavalry. Even the auto-calc judged it to be about even. I wish there was a way to force the AI to be a bit more cautious.
Cordoba is still guarded by a full stack. I just hope they have a general, otherwise it's likely to be a rinse and repeat in the city walls even with my cavalry heavy force. Where in the heck did their Sultan wind up?
I wasn't sure if LTC toned down dread at all because it does get a bit overpowered IMHO. Doesn't look like it so far.
:egypt:
:happybirthday3: Happy birthday, AG !!
:birthday2::cheerleader::elephant::belly: