Successor game rules, draft one.

[Ignoramus]

Great idea, YLC!

[mini]

so a noble conquers a province, and it is his after the annexation is approved.
What happens if the annexation is not approved?

[ULC]

so a noble conquers a province, and it is his after the annexation is approved.
What happens if the annexation is not approved?

Oh no, it's his period if he conquers it - but until he gets approval for it in the Council, the Chancellor can freely ignore the entire province, including taxes, prioritization, building queues, etc, without penalty.

This makes it difficult to hold onto - it cannot be properly reinforced except from within the kingdom/empire, is subject to higher levels of revolt and generates less income.

[AussieGiant]

One of the most balanced aspects of KotR was that all expansion needed to be legislated through the Diet. Meaning edicts to attack and a second CA (or was it another edict) to ratify the province and absorb it into the Kingdom was required.

This prevented players who are good at the game from literally tearing across the map. It also politicised land and made the politics about acquisition and allocation of land very interesting and very significant. This by extension focused everyone very squarely on the Diet sessions and what was going on in them. A complaint of the last game I believe was a lack of focus in the political threads.

I can't emphasis enough just how important land is to a feudal empire and how the game supports this in so many ways. The Diet was THE MAIN platform in KotR and it was hugely entertaining because it really meant something to go into that Thread and present your case, argue, threaten and bribe your way to success.

The second aspect of this concept was all land, once ratified, went to the King, who then allocated it to a House/Duke who then kept it himself or allocated it to one of his nobles. Again hugely appropriate both in the game and historically. The Kings position in this critical aspect of power countered the extreme executive but transient power of the Chancellor and made the King an ongoing important figure for people to constantly be forced to deal with. As a nice tie in, the Prince would one day be King so playing ahead of the succession tree was always another sub level of politics. Duke's by extension were allocated this power base to use as they see fit. At that point the land issuance was finished.

I strongly recommend this system is replicated, in a simple, effective and easy to understand format.

[ULC]

I think my idea replicates it well enough - you can't go on a conquering spree in the first place because conquered provinces would revolt one right after another or become very vulnerable to attack, while still allowing people to do something. IMO, requiring double legislation to conquer a province is cumbersome. This one still allows for a lot more freedom on politics as well.

[Zim]

The annexations rules are probably the ones I'm the most unsure of. As mentioned, I never really had much experience with having to push annexation edicts through in KOTR. I'm glad AG spoke up as someone with experience with it am curious how the debate goes.

I do want something to limit expansion as it seemed to get a little out of control in parts of LOTR. How we do so isn't a big deal to me so any further suggestions for alternate systems are welcome.

I do think it's a good thing to have conquered land go to the king before being dispensed to Houses. When it comes down to it it's the only power he has that really forces nobles to deal with him.

I should note that at the moment separate edicts to conquer and ratify annexation are not required as per KOTR, only a single annexation edict made before or after the conquest.

Of course, sooner or late a noble told to abandon his conquest or give it to a rival might say "over my dead body", a situation I would liekly let get resolved in-game rather than through gm fiat...

[ULC]

The annexations rules are probably the ones I'm the most unsure of. As mentioned, I never really had much experience with having to push annexation edicts through in KOTR. I'm glad AG spoke up as someone with experience with it am curious how the debate goes.

I do want something to limit expansion as it seemed to get a little out of control in parts of LOTR. How we do so isn't a big deal to me so any further suggestions for alternate systems are welcome.

I do think it's a good thing to have conquered land go to the king before being dispensed to Houses. When it comes down to it it's the only power he has that really forces nobles to deal with him.

I should note that at the moment separate edicts to conquer and ratify annexation are not required as per KOTR, only a single annexation edict made before or after the conquest.

Of course, sooner or late a noble told to abandon his conquest or give it to a rival might say "over my dead body", a situation I would liekly let get resolved in-game rather than through gm fiat...

Hmmm...I think I have an idea, although it might be construed as more complex.

We want people to take personal initiative, and disobedience should be an open option.
We want to limit expansion at the sametime.
We want to give the king some form of power.

So I propose we blend them together. by allowing anyone to conquer any province they see fit. however, taxes must be set to high until and the province can be ignored by the Chancellor, until the said conqueror hands the province over to Royal authority or an edict is passed with 2/3rds majority that annexes the territory.

Thoughts?

[Zim]

Posted the final mod poll thread. It appears we will be playing France, and 90% likely that we will be using the Kingdoms version of whichever mod we pick.

[Cecil XIX]

Heh, good times.

This may be slightly OOC, but I've been thinking about things that made LOTR different from KOTR. Many have been discussed, but as far as I remember one aspect that hasn't been talked about as much is the change in policy regarding avatar acquisition.

In this, KOTR (at first) and LOTR were at opposite extremes. In KOTR you had to take what the game offered, and if it wasn't offering anything you had to wait. In LOTR you could not only get an avatar at any time, you could even get options!

If those were the only two options, I think I'd prefer the former. For most of KOTR, every Elector who joined the Reich started off linked to certain people and a certain House. That was a foundation upon which to build other relations, which were, of course, what made KOTR so great. I think LOTR suffered a bit from having people able to get RGBs whenever they want. When there's no restriction on getting Avatars, the avatar you have doesn't mean as much. A lot of avatars in LOTR were just abandoned, either by people who stopped playing or people who wanted to start fresh with a new avatar. I don't think this reflects poorly on the players themselves (at least I hope not, since I myself belong to the latter group), but I do think it reveals a flaw in the incentives the rules gave the players. The avatar situation needs to be more orderly and still.

I think a middle path is best. At the very least, if a someone want to play as an RGB he should have to take the first one that pops up. There some be some limit to the availability of avatars in order for them to be seen as valuable.