Tuesday, April 09, 2013

Proposal: Actually pay out

Times Out and Fails 5-1. -RaichuKFM

Adminned at 11 Apr 2013 16:22:57 UTC

In the rule “Bribery” replace

and transferring 1 Wealth to each Vassal they gain through that Earldom (which may cause them to transfer to the same Noble multiple times).

with

. For each Barony below that Earldom, he must transfer 1 wealth to each Noble (other than himself) which is a Baron of that Barony, otherwise he cannot obtain that Earldom. (Note that this may cause them to transfer to the same Noble multiple times)

and replace

and transferring 2 Wealth to each Vassal they gain through that Dukedom (which may cause them to transfer to the same Noble multiple times).

with

. For each Earldom below that Dukedom, he must transfer 2 wealth to each Noble (other than himself) which is a Earl of that Earldom, otherwise he cannot obtain that Dukedom. (Note that this may cause them to transfer to the same Noble multiple times)

 

The “new vassals gained” bit is a little weird, I think this way makes more sense as it means the “multiple times” clause actually matters.

Specifying “other than himself” is actually important. Someone with zero wealth cannot legally transfer 1 wealth to himself. So this makes it slightly easier to buy Earldoms/Dukedoms which is a good thing.

Comments

RaichuKFM: she/her

09-04-2013 22:55:31 UTC

against Not a fan of paying X Vassals X times each.

Skju:

10-04-2013 02:56:54 UTC

Not sure what Raichu means, but aren’t Vassals for Dukedoms Baronies as well as Earldoms?

RaichuKFM: she/her

10-04-2013 10:41:36 UTC

I missed a “that” when reading it; disregard what I wrote up there.  But Skju is right.

Purplebeard:

10-04-2013 15:01:10 UTC

against Apart from the issue of Dukedoms and Baronies, this could be worded better, I think.

(also, the issue of transferring to oneself is technically already handled in the current implementation, because one cannot be one’s own Vassal. I agree that the current wording leaves much room for improvement, though)

spikebrennan:

10-04-2013 17:01:23 UTC

imperial

Clucky: he/him

10-04-2013 22:21:54 UTC

I think thematically it kinda makes more sense not to pay out the baronies. Like, you don’t care about those people as much any more. As long as the Earl’s are happy, the Baron’s don’t really get a say.

Skju:

11-04-2013 11:38:53 UTC

against Because Baron Plain.

Larrytheturtle:

11-04-2013 14:57:07 UTC

against