Quote Originally Posted by TinCow View Post
GM's Code:
So very true.


Now, from what I read, most people seem to want a compromise between KotR and LotR. (Correct me if I'm wrong).

I'll talk about Houses in an instant, first I want to talk about Ramses' proposition that votes be tied to land. While this has some merit, making land much more important and promoting conflict over land. I think it takes out too many newcomers out of the equation. I think it would be much more sensible to have some sort of system where the number of landed vassals are more important. Not only does land remain important, but people also become an important resource. I'm thinking it would make for a fun game if people had to fight for vassals and loyalty would become rather important.

If I remember correctly, LotR wanted to do that, but by tying voting power to stats, even the people with the highest ranks (like deguerra) never got high enough stats to benefit from their rank.

Now for the Houses, perhaps a mix of established "permanent" Houses and other more fluid Houses could be established. So lets say we go with the family tree being split into Houses, like KotR. We could also have RGBs who form small units of their own, similar to Houses, and who can pledge themselves to a House for a certain amount of time, at the cost of the established noble House. Just an idea and it could be more refined, it also does not remedy what to do with adoption. (I guess they could be treated case by case.)