"Very well, I shall explain. Since the Reichmarshall's army would be paid for by all electors and is there for the defence of the Reich as a whole, he cannot be partial and must act in an objective manner. If he is a client of a Duke or a Margrave, then that conflicts with this responsibility, and allows for the Duke or Margrave in question to exert undue influence over him. So in order to avoid this, the man who is elected as Reichmarschall will, for the duration of his term as such, will not be a part of any Duchy. He would thus, while serving as Reichmarschall, stop being a client of his Duke, and instead be bound only to the Kaiser and the Diet.
This means that, while he is Reichmarschall, he is not a member of any Duchy and cannot recieve income from any land that is part of one. Whether this means that he keeps the land which is then removed from the Duchy, or if he forfeits that land altogether, matters little to me, though I think the former is better, as we can then add that income to the Reichmarshall's army. When his term is over, he returns to his Duchy together with any land that he might have taken with him.
Allow me then to rephrase my proposal:
Does that clear things up for you?"Charter Amendment 4.1c
Should Charter Amendment 4.1b pass, the following should be added to the Reichmarshall position:
Penalties:
(3) The Reichmarshall's army has two priorities, in order of importance:
(4) For the duration of his term, the Reichmarschall will secede together with any land he owns from his Duchy and answer only to the Kaiser and the Diet.a) To defend the Reich's current possessionsAs such, the Reichmarshall's army cannot be used to conquer new territory
b) To reclaim lost settlements
Bookmarks