King of the Romans OOC thread XI

**Privateerkev** · 08-22-2007, 18:29

Originally Posted by Stig

I do seperate them very well.
Someone who is discussing his avatars actions OOC doesn't seperate them well. Jan has been an annoyance to Ansehelm ever since he came of age ... as he wanted power. Ansehelm doesn't like that, simple as that. Hell I'm also starting to do this now.
You PK act as Jan, act as yourself, that works far better OOC.
And you should remember that Ansehelm is the complete opposite of Jan.

And I do think that OOC we need to work on something to divide the difference between things again.
Hell it can happen that the Kaiser has less influence than a Elector. While in real this might be possible, in votings the Kaiser is always right.

My point exactly.

Then we have different playing styles. I have been doing stuff like this for years and am quite capable of seperating the IC from the OOC. On here, it is all me I assure you. None of Jan is leaking into this. I do feel confident though in speaking of him in a semi-objective way OOC so I will do so when I think it adds to things. Others do this too and I do not see you berating them.

**TinCow** · 08-22-2007, 18:37

I personally very much enjoy the House/Feudal aspect of KOTR. It has become a central aspect to the game and has really made it vibrant. That said, we are very deep into the game and I think it would be a bit wrong to change all of the vassalge rules at this point. There are plenty of ways for the Kaiser, the Dukes, and the King to reward/punish their followers if they get a bit creative.

Whenever we do the next game, I think we should put more thought into the rank/vassalage structure to make it a bit smoother and perhaps increase the rewards for climbing the ladder. That's a long way off though, and can be dealt with in detail when the time arrives.

**Tamur** · 08-22-2007, 18:39

That said, we are very deep into the game and I think it would be a bit wrong to change all of the vassalge rules at this point.

Completely agreed, that would definitely be a mistake. But it is something to think on for the next go-round.

**Stig** · 08-22-2007, 18:45

That said, we are very deep into the game and I think it would be a bit wrong to change all of the vassalge rules at this point.

No that's not needed. But we somehow need to ensure that a Ruler can properly punish his elector if he says that the elector is banned from the Diet, for example.
If the Kaiser bans someone Econ will simply delete all other posts, however if the King or a Duke does this the Elector can simply say: screw you, and post anyway.

In real, this person would be as low as a peasant. However here he can still come into the Diet and even vote.

**FactionHeir** · 08-22-2007, 18:48

The only thing I could possibly think of that a Duke can currently do against a dissident is to give him command of the HA and instrcut the chancellor to keep it at min strength. Then give as HA order to raid deep into enemy territory...of course that would require some cooperation from the chancellor - who of course has more power than dukes and could send anyone to their deaths if he wanted to.

**TinCow** · 08-22-2007, 18:55

There are plenty of things you can do, Stig. Giving and taking away Counties is no small thing. If anything, Jan's lack of a Franconian county was one of the things that made him flee to Outremer. Furthermore, you can give your Electors command of your Household Armies (now that there will be 2). This will give them battles to fight, which is an incentive for most people. At the same time, you can strip an Elector of command of an Army, thereby denying him battles as a punishment. This doesn't even take into account the biggest incentive of all: making someone the heir to the Duchy. Many players will do almost anything their Duke says if they believe it will lead to them inheriting the title.

If a Duke has a very serious problem with an Elector that cannot be solved any other way, you can always make an appeal to the Chancellor to have him help you. The Chancellor can go so far as to make sure the person finds himself in an un-winnable battle, facing disgrace or even death. This is another reason to be on good terms with the ruling Chancellor, as it gives you access to options you would not otherwise have. It is perfectly reasonable for the 'factions' that support the Chancellor to receive preferrential treatment and the occassional favor in-game. Remember: there is essentially nothing that the Chancellor cannot do. You may have to negotiate for what you want, but unless you have really angered the Chancellor, I suspect he would be willing to aid you in some manner.

**Tamur** · 08-22-2007, 18:55

...keep it at min strength. Then give as HA order to raid deep into enemy territory...

lol! oh think of the stories thread after an episode like that. I'd enjoy it personally, battling against all odds, returning to extract terrible vengeance... sounds like that Hero with a thousand faces popping up again.

**Privateerkev** · 08-22-2007, 19:03

Originally Posted by TinCow

Giving and taking away Counties is no small thing. If anything, Jan's lack of a Franconian county was one of the things that made him flee to Outremer.

That is absolutly correct TC.

Ansehelm's reply to Jan was basically, "you already have a county in Outremer so there is no need to give you one here."

not a good move if your trying to get someone to be loyal to your house.

Was definately one of the nails in the coffin in Jan's loyalty to the house.

**Stig** · 08-22-2007, 19:03

There are plenty of things you can do, Stig.

You forget the IC punishments in the Diet. In real the Duke could say against an Elector that that Elector wouldn't be allowed to vote, nothing stops him now (not an Elector is no Count).
And how is Arnold going to take away Household Armies?
And how do you punish people in the Outremer?

**TinCow** · 08-22-2007, 19:04

Just off the top of my head, here is a list of things that the Chancellor can do without violating the Charter. If you are in good enough standing with the Chancellor or are willing to pay his price, all of these may be available to you. If you have enough standing with the Chancellor to actually make him violate the Charter, there are no limits to what you can do.

1) Have your enemies' armies disbanded.
2) Have your enemies' armies march in the wrong direction, slowing their progress.
3) Have your enemies' armies march into battle against a much stronger foe.
4) Make sure you enemies do not receive reinforcements for their armies or only very poor quality reinforcements.
5) Prevent your enemies from having any of their build queues completed.
6) Have you enemies' avatars stuck in places where they can obtain bad traits.
7) If the enemy forgets to give instructions on the tax level of his settlements, the Chancellor can jack up the tax rate, disband some of the garrison, and cause the settlement to revolt.
8) Have your enemies with low piety march near Inquisitors.
9) Have your enemies march near enemy assassins.

I am sure I can come up with many, many more, but I think you get my point.

**Cecil XIX** · 08-22-2007, 19:06

I was mistaken when I ascribed my views to the fuedal system. Actually, I was thinking of a passage from The Prince.

I answer that the principalities of which one has record are found to be governed in two different ways: either by a prince, with a body of servants, who assist him to govern the kingdom as ministers by his favour and permission; or by a prince and barons, who hold that dignity by antiquity of blood and not by the grace of the prince. Such barons have states and their own subjects, who recognize them as lords and hold them in natural affection. Those states that are governed by a prince and his servants hold their prince in more consideration, because in all the country there is no one who is recognized as superior to him, and if they yield obedience to another they do it as to a minister and official, and they do not bear him any particular affection.

The examples of these two governments in our time are the Turk and the King of France. The entire monarchy of the Turk is governed by one lord, the others are his servants; and, dividing his kingdom into sanjaks, he sends there different administrators, and shifts and changes them as he chooses. But the King of France is placed in the midst of an ancient body of lords, acknowledged by their own subjects, and beloved by them; they have their own prerogatives, nor can the king take these away except at his peril.

Anyways, something to think about. I think that adaquetly describes our choices.

**Privateerkev** · 08-22-2007, 19:07

Originally Posted by TinCow

Just off the top of my head, here is a list of things that the Chancellor can do without violating the Charter. If you are in good enough standing with the Chancellor or are willing to pay his price, all of these may be available to you. If you have enough standing with the Chancellor to actually make him violate the Charter, there are no limits to what you can do.

Hence why it is a good idea to help the Chancellor get elected. Not only can you do those things, but you can get the Chancellor to refuse to let your enemies to do them to you. Or he will at least up his asking price.

**Tamur** · 08-22-2007, 19:08

*The power of the Chancellor comes disconcertingly into focus*

So, Matthias, what was your favourite ice cream flavour again?

edit: very interesting quote CecilXIX, that's a book I have not touched but should at some point.

**Privateerkev** · 08-22-2007, 19:09

Just remember that Matthias is sober so the usual offerings of beer won't work.

**Warmaster Horus** · 08-22-2007, 19:58

Hmm. What happens when there's a tie between yes and no for an edict? It seems that's going to happen for 12.2.

**Privateerkev** · 08-22-2007, 20:00

With a tie, it loses. But the number of people who vote isn't the whole story. We have to add up everyone's voting power. That is your one electoral vote plus your influence.

*edit*

Edict 12.2 is going to lose 31-32

**TinCow** · 08-22-2007, 21:04

Originally Posted by Privateerkev

Edict 12.2 is going to lose 31-32

GH submitted his votes to econ21 because he is away for a few days. Unless he abstained on that Edict, his vote will decide it one way or another.

**Warmaster Horus** · 08-22-2007, 21:12

Ah, right, I forgot.

**Privateerkev** · 08-22-2007, 21:13

Originally Posted by TinCow

GH submitted his votes to econ21 because he is away for a few days. Unless he abstained on that Edict, his vote will decide it one way or another.

Doh!

Proxy voting!

The bane of the anal-retentive number cruncher...

**FactionHeir** · 08-23-2007, 03:58

Well, even without GH's vote it would have passed, as econ didn't give me the extra +2 influence as steward in absence of the duke.

**Privateerkev** · 08-23-2007, 04:00

Econ said something about this last time that Stewards only get the +2 if there is no Duke at all like in the beginning of the game.

**OverKnight** · 08-23-2007, 05:17

I have waded through the queues, HA orders and legislation and will begin playing on from the save soon.

**Tamur** · 08-23-2007, 06:39

Somehow I get the feeling that the Chancellor should get a salary...

**OverKnight** · 08-23-2007, 06:46

The job has it benefits. It's made me a better player actually.

Hell I had to be Chancellor to get my character knighted.

Edit: I love Pavise Crossbowmen.

**FactionHeir** · 08-23-2007, 07:58

You are saying you just killed an idle Mongol stack with Pavise?

**OverKnight** · 08-23-2007, 08:10

Battle Queue 1280

Check for latest save.

Busy year, not counting my own battle or one for Arnold, we've got five on the docket.

Only take the save once you're prepared to fight and upload. Post when you take and post a link when you upload.

Good Hunting.

Count Karl Zirn - Completed