KOTF OOC Thread

**Ramses II CP** · 09-23-2009, 16:17

AG had the option not to turn the settlement over to the King if he was worried. At the time he conquered it I don't think he had any reason to worry.

I would suggest that there is logically a period of time between the conquest and the handover, perhaps the rest of that turn, to move your army again and exit the city (I did exactly this at Valencia, Zaragosa, and Marseille, departing each time immediately after conquest). Unfortunately AG has been in Caeranarvon for quite awhile.

**OverKnight** · 09-23-2009, 16:25

The explanations make sense, it just takes some time to wrap my head around the new rules.

**AussieGiant** · 09-23-2009, 17:42

So what your all saying is that if I move any troops out of Caernarvon it's a rule violation because at the moment in time I took it, every unit was under the command of the King? Keep in mind that happened every single time with every single province capture and nothing was said.

Or is this something that was agreed IC and now is enforced in the OOC rules?

Would be nice to know before I took the save right now.

**Ramses II CP** · 09-23-2009, 18:12

No, you have to relinquish it to the King's control. I've been operating on the assumption that surrendering it to the King happens by default because it would be tedious to announce it constantly, but the turn you take it you can decide not to give it to the King if you wish.

Since it's an active decision for the person capturing the city or castle I've taken it for granted that there is leeway the same turn as the capture to move your forces out... say it happens before you officially turn the province over to the King. After that turn passes, however, those men are the King's if he wants them.

This is the first time the rule has been tested, however, so we should work things out for absolute certain before we proceed if it's going to cause conflict.

**_Tristan_** · 09-23-2009, 18:12

IC or OOC, Philippe would have faced the same problem in Frankfurt a few turns ago if Thomas had refused to let his men go...

So there's nothing new here. IMHO.

**Ituralde** · 09-23-2009, 18:20

Maybe we should make it clearer in the rules when exactly this 'automatic transfer' to the King takes place, so when is the right time to refuse. If it would be the second after the capture then no one would have ever been able to pull out of a city he captured with his troops without the King giving permission or declaring war on the King. This truly would be absurd as AG pointed out rightly.

Maybe we should clarify this with a Rule Change. Something like the 'turn after the settlement is captured' inserted into the passage that handles the whole thing now.

**AussieGiant** · 09-23-2009, 18:23

So at the moment everyone would be fine I get permission from the King then I can take the troops out?

We can tighten up the rule at the next council session.

**Ituralde** · 09-23-2009, 18:39

As long as the King allows it it would be fine either way. It would become interesting if the King didn't allow you taking the troops out of the settlement.

The rule change would only make the whole affair more clear for future conquests.

So once again the disclaimer for everybody:

IF you want to keep your army:

Do NOT enter a town owned by another noble!
Do NOT stay in a town you have conquered!
Do NOT stay in a town you intend to give away!

UNLESS you are pretty sure of the noble who owns/will own the settlement.

Which brings me to another point that we should maybe cover now, before there is a rules dispute over it. As it stands currently you have no securities that the person of another settlement will not just change his SoT the second you enter his settlement. So before you enter, it said everyone can come and go, but once you have walked into his trap he can just change his SoT and have that juicy army of yours under his control.

Well I think that's stupid and also unfair, as accessing a save and moving is a much more time-consuming action than just changing a post on the forum. So maybe another Rule clarification is needed that states that SoT changes pertaining to the garrisoning of units do not go into effect until the next season. That way if someone changes his SoT you would have enough time to get the **** out of there.

Does that sound reasonable? Or have I lost everybody?

**ULC** · 09-23-2009, 18:37

Originally Posted by Ituralde

Maybe we should make it clearer in the rules when exactly this 'automatic transfer' to the King takes place, so when is the right time to refuse. If it would be the second after the capture then no one would have ever been able to pull out of a city he captured with his troops without the King giving permission or declaring war on the King. This truly would be absurd as AG pointed out rightly.

Maybe we should clarify this with a Rule Change. Something like the 'turn after the settlement is captured' inserted into the passage that handles the whole thing now.

I always envisioned it as simply being until the next Council session, and IMHO, that would be the easiest way to implement it. Once the Council session starts, all "unclaimed" province "deeds" are gathered and sent to the Council, who then ratify them to make them part of the King's Demense. It is either at that time or beforehand that you declare whether or not you are giving up the "deed". This also gives plenty of time for the conqueror, and reduces the headache of keeping track of provinces.

**Ituralde** · 09-23-2009, 18:42

Originally Posted by YLC

I always envisioned it as simply being until the next Council session, and IMHO, that would be the easiest way to implement it. Once the Council session starts, all "unclaimed" province "deeds" are gathered and sent to the Council, who then ratify them to make them part of the King's Demense. It is either at that time or beforehand that you declare whether or not you are giving up the "deed". This also gives plenty of time for the conqueror, and reduces the headache of keeping track of provinces.

That would give a problem with those provinces that were ratified beforehand. Should they also wait?
I would be fine with this too, but I think this shows that we obviously need some OOC clarification on the matter. It doesn't have to be a rule change, but some consensus would be nice.