KOTF OOC Thread

[econ21]

I always saw it as the person conquering holding it, whether it be the King or not, and it being personally theirs, although nothing can be done with it until it was ratified and made part of the Royaume/Kingdom.

But where does it say "nothing can be done with it"? It says you can't recruit nor put taxes below high. But there is nothing about transferring ownership. I think it's a grey area, but I would allow transfer.

My preference would be for us to decide this in character rather than by an OOC adjudication of what the rules mean. (By all means amend or clarify the game rules afterward to make them reflect the IC decision.) The reason is that I think this rule reflects "politics" rather than "physics". If Gaspard is denied a chance to run for the second time - this time for a "technicality" - then there are clearly political consequences and ruling him out on OOC grounds feels a little odd.

[ULC]

Oh no, I do mean you could transfer it - but as it was not a part of the Kingdom, it could not be used to determine who could or could not run for Seneschal.

[econ21]

Oh no, I do mean you could transfer it - but as it was not a part of the Kingdom, it could not be used to determine who could or could not run for Seneschal.

The game rules say a Baron "Must have personal control of a province"; there's nothing about it being ratifed or it "part of the Kingdom". I think it's a grey area and the rules as written do not prevent the King giving Antwerp to Gaspard if he wants to and Gaspard running for Seneschal. If the King doesn't want to do that - for legalistic or other reasons - that's fine too.

[Ituralde]

I think we've covecer it from every OOC angle now. The only decision that remains now if we carry this over to IC and then maybe clarify the rules. Or do we do it all OOC and have an OOC vote on it.

I state again my preference for this to be settled through IC politics. Much more interesting than resolving into some lawyer feud OOC.

[Ignoramus]

Anyway, if there is a rule dispute, then the king has the call. So if the rule is ambiguous, then it's up to Tristan to decide.

I had wondered about this, but considered it alright as no one in the Order had mentioned it while discussing whether I'd run or not.

[AussieGiant]

Again I certainly agree Igno,

There have been many things done which if challenged would probably have held. If no one complains then that is part of the IC aspect to it.

There is a risk involved.

You don't want to annoy the King for example. Leave that to others and make sure you're working behnid the scenes.

[Ignoramus]

Thanks for the signature advice, Ituralde! I finally got it to work to my satisfaction.

[GeneralHankerchief]

The proposed amendment could be abused by an adventuresome Seneschal. For example if we somehow acquired Scotland in a trade, even if no one but the Seneschal wished to acquire it, under this proposal, the new lands would automatically be part of the Realm.

Yes, something like this would never happen. Scotland of all places! But I use the example to show my point.

Well done.

[AussieGiant]

I agree with you Econ.

The unique situation with the King taking a province is that it is his and therefore is in the Kings Demesne straight away and ready to be handed out.

The two issues you bring up are also valid.

Caernarvon and Antwerp are certainly not exactly to the letter of the law of the edict as they were not bordering.

The interesting thing about Antwerp is that it started rebel, went to the Germans. It's a stronger case to mention because it was not bordering and it was german at the time of conquest.

All this can be done IC. But it might seem a little strange randomly bringing it up for no IC reason.