Difference between revisions of "Talk:Duchy Reformation Ideas"
(New page: ==Counter Proposals== You've come to BattleMaster about three or four years too late. Rulers did used to enjoy limitless power and they could strip any noble of their title. But that opti...) |
m (→Duchy Independence: new section) |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
You've come to BattleMaster about three or four years too late. Rulers did used to enjoy limitless power and they could strip any noble of their title. But that option was routinely and regularly abused, Dukes were no more powerful than lords and the politics/intrigue side of BattleMaster was near non-existent. People were only interested in Cities for their gold. It would be a massive backwards step to reintroduce such an overpowered mechanic as title stripping for rulers. --[[User:Revan|Revan]] 21:30, 19 August 2009 (UTC) | You've come to BattleMaster about three or four years too late. Rulers did used to enjoy limitless power and they could strip any noble of their title. But that option was routinely and regularly abused, Dukes were no more powerful than lords and the politics/intrigue side of BattleMaster was near non-existent. People were only interested in Cities for their gold. It would be a massive backwards step to reintroduce such an overpowered mechanic as title stripping for rulers. --[[User:Revan|Revan]] 21:30, 19 August 2009 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Duchy Independence == | ||
| + | |||
| + | Per your point "A": Duchies can be very independent, if the duke and lords want to be. If the duke wants to be a power monger, he can make his own army, and have his lords appoint their nobles to his army. Then he selects a marshal loyal only to him. He now controls the military power of his duchy, and through his lords the food supply of his duchy. He now has, essentially, an independent realm-within-a-realm. The only thing he doesn't have is control of his own diplomacy and ability to recruit in his "capital". While recruiting away from the capital has always be on the "Frequently asked, frequently rejected" list, there was some possible talk about duchy-based recruitment. Maybe some day... Internal realm diplomacy and duchy TOs? I don't know that this could ever happen, as it would probably entail some massive recoding. --[[User:Indirik|Indirik]] ([[User talk:Indirik|talk]]), [[BattleMaster Wiki:Editors|Editor]] ([[BattleMaster Wiki:User-Editors Talk|talk]]) 21:57, 19 August 2009 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 23:57, 19 August 2009
Counter Proposals
You've come to BattleMaster about three or four years too late. Rulers did used to enjoy limitless power and they could strip any noble of their title. But that option was routinely and regularly abused, Dukes were no more powerful than lords and the politics/intrigue side of BattleMaster was near non-existent. People were only interested in Cities for their gold. It would be a massive backwards step to reintroduce such an overpowered mechanic as title stripping for rulers. --Revan 21:30, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
Duchy Independence
Per your point "A": Duchies can be very independent, if the duke and lords want to be. If the duke wants to be a power monger, he can make his own army, and have his lords appoint their nobles to his army. Then he selects a marshal loyal only to him. He now controls the military power of his duchy, and through his lords the food supply of his duchy. He now has, essentially, an independent realm-within-a-realm. The only thing he doesn't have is control of his own diplomacy and ability to recruit in his "capital". While recruiting away from the capital has always be on the "Frequently asked, frequently rejected" list, there was some possible talk about duchy-based recruitment. Maybe some day... Internal realm diplomacy and duchy TOs? I don't know that this could ever happen, as it would probably entail some massive recoding. --Indirik (talk), Editor (talk) 21:57, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
