KOTR Postmortem and Next-Gen Rules Discussion

[Northnovas]

Now that is thinking there has to be something there for the Knight and that would be the type of influence that could work both ways and utilizing the oath of fealty.

[FactionHeir]

Hmmm it could make sense with vassal knights having a vote, but why not just give them a settlement and make them baronet with it? I guess you could "gamble" and hope they vote your way... it certainly is an interesting proposition.

Army composition: Some limitations are good, just not too stringent as they are currently. If we play a Western faction, I do think we should have a knight limit (only those units that are actually knights) to reflect their rarity in those times.

Avatars do not start with a free command point, but most avatars start with either 1 point in GoodCommander or NaturalMilitarySkill at adoption/birth/generation.

If vassals do not vote as their lord commands, could this be then construed as an offense, as in breaking fealty? It would make sense IMO, or else there isn't much reason behind fealty.

[Privateerkev]

Hmmm it could make sense with vassal knights having a vote, but why not just give them a settlement and make them baronet with it? I guess you could "gamble" and hope they vote your way... it certainly is an interesting proposition.

I guess that is for when a higher rank does not have counties to give. He can only give his patronage and protection. (and armies). The Knight gets a vote. Seems like a fair trade. Obviously, the knight can get land later when there is some.

If vassals do not vote as their lord commands, could this be then construed as an offense, as in breaking fealty? It would make sense IMO, or else there isn't much reason behind fealty.

I'm mixed. On one hand, it limits voting freedom, on the other hand, the vassel could just break off and join another lord. Do you guys think this is a good balance? I'm not sure.