Results 1 to 30 of 287

Thread: Successor game rules, draft one.

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    King Philippe of France Senior Member _Tristan_'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Reigning over France
    Posts
    3,264

    Default Re: Successor game rules, draft one.

    Could someone point out to me which of points 5 or 15 do apply ? They seem redundant and specify different numbers

    King:
    Requirements: Must be the in-game faction leader.
    Influence: Equal to Authority stat.
    Powers:
    (1) Can propose an unlimited number of Edicts or Amendments per Council Session.
    (2) Can set the build queue and tax rate for all settlements in the King's Demesne. Can destroy any building in those settlements and can rename any of them at any time.
    (3) Can call Emergency Council Sessions.
    (4) Cannot be banned from a Council Session.
    (5) If this rank is held during a Normal Council Session, can Prioritize a total of 8 units per full 10 turn Seneschal term.
    (6) Can declare war on any faction at any time, for any reason.
    (7) Can veto one Edict or Amendment per 3 ranks of Authority.
    (8) Decides which noble, if any, a Princess should marry.
    (9) Can allocate all newly conquered land, or let it remain within the King's Demesne if he wishes.
    (10) Once during his reign, the King may automatically assume the post of Seneschal for a single term. The King must declare that he is exercising that right at a Council Session; He will then be appointed Seneschal with no election. This right can only be invoked once, but the King can also compete in normal Seneschal elections.
    (11) Can ban Nobles from a Council Session. Banned Nobles cannot speak or propose legislations, but they are permitted to vote.
    (12) Can adjudicate on disputes regarding Edicts and Codex Amendments. However, if a dispute directly involves the King or the Prince, the Seneschal will be the adjudicator.
    (13) Can rename the faction at any time.
    (14) Can move the Capital at any time, as long as the new Capital is within the King's Demesne.
    (15) Can prioritize 5 units per term.
    Penalties:
    (1) Cannot hold any other feudal rank except that of Seneschal.
    (2) Cannot swear an Oath of Fealty to another Senator and cannot have any Vassals.
    Inheritance: On the death of a King, all Oaths of Fealty pertaining to the Noble who is now King are instantly broken, with no penalties. The new King takes control of any provinces in the King's Demesne, as well as retaining those under his control at the time of his ascension. If he was Duke of his House, his named heir for that post attains the rank. In the absence of a named heir, the second in charge of the House becomes Duke.
    King Baldwin the Tyrant, King of Jerusalem, Warden of the Holy Sepulchre, Slayer of Sultans in the Crusades Hotseat (new write-up here and previous write-up here)
    Methodios Tagaris, Caesar and Rebelin LotR
    Mexica Sunrise : An Aztec AAR



    Philippe 1er de France
    in King of the Franks

  2. #2
    Chretien Saisset Senior Member OverKnight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Massachusetts, USA
    Posts
    2,891

    Default Re: Successor game rules, draft one.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tristan de Castelreng View Post
    Could someone point out to me which of points 5 or 15 do apply ? They seem redundant and specify different numbers

    King:
    Requirements: Must be the in-game faction leader.
    Influence: Equal to Authority stat.
    Powers:
    (1) Can propose an unlimited number of Edicts or Amendments per Council Session.
    (2) Can set the build queue and tax rate for all settlements in the King's Demesne. Can destroy any building in those settlements and can rename any of them at any time.
    (3) Can call Emergency Council Sessions.
    (4) Cannot be banned from a Council Session.
    (5) If this rank is held during a Normal Council Session, can Prioritize a total of 8 units per full 10 turn Seneschal term.
    (6) Can declare war on any faction at any time, for any reason.
    (7) Can veto one Edict or Amendment per 3 ranks of Authority.
    (8) Decides which noble, if any, a Princess should marry.
    (9) Can allocate all newly conquered land, or let it remain within the King's Demesne if he wishes.
    (10) Once during his reign, the King may automatically assume the post of Seneschal for a single term. The King must declare that he is exercising that right at a Council Session; He will then be appointed Seneschal with no election. This right can only be invoked once, but the King can also compete in normal Seneschal elections.
    (11) Can ban Nobles from a Council Session. Banned Nobles cannot speak or propose legislations, but they are permitted to vote.
    (12) Can adjudicate on disputes regarding Edicts and Codex Amendments. However, if a dispute directly involves the King or the Prince, the Seneschal will be the adjudicator.
    (13) Can rename the faction at any time.
    (14) Can move the Capital at any time, as long as the new Capital is within the King's Demesne.
    (15) Can prioritize 5 units per term.
    Penalties:
    (1) Cannot hold any other feudal rank except that of Seneschal.
    (2) Cannot swear an Oath of Fealty to another Senator and cannot have any Vassals.
    Inheritance: On the death of a King, all Oaths of Fealty pertaining to the Noble who is now King are instantly broken, with no penalties. The new King takes control of any provinces in the King's Demesne, as well as retaining those under his control at the time of his ascension. If he was Duke of his House, his named heir for that post attains the rank. In the absence of a named heir, the second in charge of the House becomes Duke.
    Great minds think alike:

    Quote Originally Posted by OverKnight View Post
    The King has two powers related to unit priortisation:

    (5) If this rank is held during a Normal Council Session, can prioritize a total of 8 units per full 10 turn Seneschal term.
    and
    (15) Can prioritize 5 units per term.

    Is this as designed, ensuring that a new King can still priortize at least 5 units? Or is it a typo?
    Quote Originally Posted by Zim View Post
    Overknight That's definitely a mistake. 5 units was intended. Thanks for pointing it out.
    Chretien Saisset, Chevalier in the King of the Franks PBM

  3. #3
    Wandering Metsuke Senior Member Zim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    5,190

    Default Re: Successor game rules, draft one.

    Major rules edit:

    -TinCow's edits incorporated.
    -Additional minor proofreading and editting done.
    -Draft system added
    -Ability added for GM to recruit AI stacks, not meant to be used often (although AI factions will be buffed at the beginning of the game, mostly to offset the huge advantage in RGBs we have at the start...
    -Dual prioritization lines under King's powers fixed.

    The rules are in their more or less final draft. The Council is set to start Monday morning (sometime after 12 AM PST). The next two days, among other things, will be used to resolve and remaining rules issues.
    V&V RIP Helmut Becker, Duke of Bavaria.



    Come to the Throne Room for hotseats and TW rpgs!

    Kermit's made a TWS2 guide? Oh, the other frog....

  4. #4
    Wandering Metsuke Senior Member Zim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    5,190

    Default Re: Successor game rules, draft one.

    Does anyone think I should just change all uses of the term "House" to "Duchy"? Or is that not generic enough in case someone tries to start a military order like in LOTR?
    V&V RIP Helmut Becker, Duke of Bavaria.



    Come to the Throne Room for hotseats and TW rpgs!

    Kermit's made a TWS2 guide? Oh, the other frog....

  5. #5
    Cthonic God of Deception Member ULC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    In the swirling maddening chaos of the cosmos unseen to man...
    Posts
    4,138

    Default Re: Successor game rules, draft one.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zim View Post
    Does anyone think I should just change all uses of the term "House" to "Duchy"? Or is that not generic enough in case someone tries to start a military order like in LOTR?
    I think it is fine as is, for the reason you specified above if not others we may or may not foresee.

  6. #6
    Bureaucratically Efficient Senior Member TinCow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Posts
    13,729

    Default Re: Successor game rules, draft one.

    I agree, leave it as House. Nobles can swear oaths to non-Dukes. Thus, we could get groups of lords and vassals that have a feudal relationship, but are not in a Duchy. There are also many, many different roleplaying reasons that people would want to call their group something other than Duchy of XXXX.


  7. #7
    Senior Member Senior Member econ21's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    9,651

    Default Re: Successor game rules, draft one.

    I know it is last minute, but I think we need to add something to the rules to make our concept of who leads an army match the computers. Specifically, in 1 (c), we have:

    A player whose avatar leads an army that is involved in a battle will be expected to fight that battle.
    The problem is that the computer will assign army leadership to general with the highest command stars (let's call him player A), not the one who IC is the leader (typically the most senior feudal rank - player B). Consequently, player B will fight a battle, but player A will get any resulting traits. This just seems wrong - player B should get any traits from the victory. Furthermore, a dreadful/chivalrous player B may lower/raise player A's chivalry when deciding what to do with the prisoners/captured settlement etc. Again, this is topsy-turvey.

    In the KotR rules, we let the computer's choice of the general be the one to fight the battle (ie player A). But later on we altered that to allow household armies be led by their politically designated leaders (player B). However, that did not cause much of an issue, as by the time we had household armies, our avatars were spread across many settlements and typically the politically more senior general also had a ton of command stars (so the player B was also the player A).

    But with KotF, we are starting with many recruitable generals in a few settlements and the equivalent of five household armies, so we can expect a number of RBGs to be stacked in a given army. Furthermore, some of the politically more senior generals (the non-royal Dukes) have pretty mediocre command stats. IIRC, they typically have one star whereas a number of the RBGs have four stars. I'm also thinking of a possible Order of the Fleurs Lys stack in the future, where the general would be the one elected Captain for that term rather than the one with the highest command.

    If we leave the rules as they are - with the IC leadership and the computer leadership mismatched - we may well get some undesirable player interactions whereby Dukes prefer to fight alone or kick high command subordinates from battles.

    What I propose is that we use the console to make the computer's choice for who leads the army the same as ours. That is to say, we give the army stack leader (player B) sufficient traits to have more command stars than his subordinates. So I propose we add in to 1(b)

    The GM will use the console to give the avatar leading the army more command stars than any other avatar in the stack. Any bonus traits given this way will be withdrawn as soon as they are unnecessary.
    The way I suggest we do this is through the NaturalMilitarySkill trait, as this should be able to give most commanders up to 4 more stars, which should be enough. I suggest this trait rather than any other, as it seems to be largely triggered on birth, adoption, marriage and coming of age rather than through battle events. If we use some of the traits with battle-related triggers, we may have a problem messing up any post-battle traits awarded (e.g. making someone a great general pushes up the threshold for them to get another command star).

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    Trait NaturalMilitarySkill
    Characters family

    Level Talent_for_Command
    Description Talent_for_Command_desc
    EffectsDescription Talent_for_Command_effects_desc
    Threshold 1

    Effect Command 1

    Level Natural_Commander
    Description Natural_Commander_desc
    EffectsDescription Natural_Commander_effects_desc
    Threshold 2

    Effect Command 2

    Level Born_to_Command
    Description Born_to_Command_desc
    EffectsDescription Born_to_Command_effects_desc
    Threshold 3

    Effect Command 3

    Level Born_Conqueror
    Description Born_Conqueror_desc
    EffectsDescription Born_Conqueror_effects_desc
    Threshold 4

    Effect Command 4


    I realise doing this gives us a bit of an edge of the AI, but I understand that - outside of autocalc - command stars only affect morale in the locality of the general. They do not raise attack and defense stats like in some earlier TW games (e.g. MTW). Honestly, I don't think we need worry too much about the morale of our men near our generals - if we lose, typically it will be because we messed up and/or are grossly outmatched rather than because our troops' morale wavered at a critical point. I am much more worried about the implications of a player A vs player B mismatch than a small edge over the AI.

    If we implement this change, then over time, console usage should be less important. The Dukes will quickly gain command stars and overtake the RBGs without requiring extra traits from the GM. The natural military strategy trait can then be clawed back using the console. But unless we initially rig it so that they are treated as the commanding general by the computer, the Dukes will not be able to pick up command stars from battles involving more talented subordinates and will never take off as avatars despite their players having to fight all the battles.

    An alternative workaround might be to make any players in a stack with a higher command than the leader enter as reinforcements (ie kick them from the stack but leave them adjacent). But given our willingness to use the console for stuff like getting rid of unwanted ancillaries, I think resorting to the console may be a neater fix. (Separating out some RBGs may only be possible in offensive battles - in defensive ones, we may be taken by surprise and unable to organise it.)

    We could agree to stay with the status quo and resolve the player A/player B discrepancies in character - initially mediocre Dukes may decide to sideline talented commanders and keep them out of battles. That's historically not unprecedented. It's plausible that sometimes a talented subordinate might get the praise (traits) for a victory rather than their mediocre boss. However, on balance, I think a little console usage might be better than such role-playing contortions. Certainly, I can't see much of a rationale for the talented subordinate rather than the commander getting chivalry/dread from the commander's post battle acts.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO