Sunday, April 07, 2013

Proposal: Feudal Hierarchies and Armies

Self-killed -larrytheturtle

Adminned at 08 Apr 2013 22:00:00 UTC

Enact a new rule entitled “Armies”:

Each Noble has a non-zero integer statistic called “armies” that defaults to 0 and is tracked in the GNDT.
At any time, a Noble may spend 2 wealth to gain 1 army.

Enact a subrule to “Titles” entitled “Vassalage”:

Once per week, a noble may collect wealth from all of their vassals directly below their title. A Duke may collect a maximum of 5 wealth per Baron,  a Baron may collect a maximum of 3 wealth from each Earldom. When collecting, a noble must collect from all possible vassals.
In order to take this action in a Proper manner, the noble must provide each of their vassals with 1 army.

Once per week a Noble may attempt to gain Lordship over another noble in one of the following ways:

In a Proper Manner: A Noble (A) may post a story post entitled “Title Offer: [name of title]”,in which A offers an Abeyant title below A’s title as well as any other amounts of wealth or armies. Upon posting this story post, the title offered by (A) ceases to be “Abeyant”, and becomes “A’s [Title]” and A must purchase the title in any manner available to them (i.e. via Bribery). In the comments of the story post, any Noble who wants to gain the title offered and is not already a Vassal to a Noble other than A, may make a comment with for in the comment. The title offer remains active for a week after it was posted. Once any Noble responds with a for , A may close the offer and give the title to any single noble who posted a for in their response. If, at the end of the week, only one noble has responded with a for, A must appoint that noble to the position. In either of the cases, the title transfers from A to the noble acquiring the title and A must give the offered armies and wealth to the noble acquiring the title. If no Nobles have responded with a for after a week, the offer closes, and the title returns to being Abeyant.

Alternatively: A Noble (A) may attack any other Noble (B) whose title is below them. If (A) has 5 more armies than (B) than (A) gains Lordship over, at most, one of (B)‘s titles. Doing so costs (A) 2 army and 1 dignity (in addition to the dignity lost for not performing this action in a Proper Manner). If title that (A) gained Lordship over was under Lordship to a different Noble (C), (C) loses lordship over (B).

A Noble may only gain Lordship over a Noble who is directly below their title. A Noble may only gain Lordship over a Noble who is in the same family as they are. A Noble may never gain Lordship over a Title they already gain lordship over.

Amend the text of the rule “Bribery” to read:

A Noble whose Family isn’t “-” may spend 4 Wealth to obtain an Abeyant Barony.
If an Earldom is Abeyant, a Baron may obtain that Earldom by spending 8 Wealth and transferring 1 Wealth to each Vassal they gain through that Earldom (which may cause them to transfer to the same Noble multiple times).
If a Dukedom is Abeyant, an Earl may obtain that Dukedom by spending 12 Wealth and transferring 2 Wealth to each Vassal they gain through that Dukedom (which may cause them to transfer to the same Noble multiple times).

A system for allowing the creation of a complex system of hierarchies that provides benefits for the title owners. Also, creating armies. Finally, re-tuning bribery to allow for the creation of a not already predetermined hierarchy.

Sorry this is so long.



07-04-2013 21:40:19 UTC

against Wait, wait, wait. “Each Noble has a non-zero integer statistic…that defaults to zero”. Should that be “non-negative”? Furthermore, the action “provide each of their vassals with 1 army” is ambiguous; does the Noble doing so lose those armies from their own supply, or do the vassals gain armies from thin air? Finally, this excessively overcomplicates the hierarchy of titles; I’m having a lot of trouble figuring out exactly how combat would work (not to mention that it should cost much more than (1 + Improper) Dignity, seeing as how it would only allow attacks *within* families).


07-04-2013 21:49:05 UTC

Yes, I intended non-negative, that was a slip on my part. Also, I intended that the providing would take out of the nobles supply and I think that is a reasonable interpretation. Combat at the moment is straight forward. If you have 5 more armies than another player you win. People last dynasty didn’t like dice rolls. I’m willing to tweak the combat, but I wanted to set up a basic framework. Finally, we can tweak the loss of dignity. I am potentially interested in allowing the taking over of titles not within one’s family, but didn’t set it up for that.

That being said, this is a really long proposal. While I realize that it has it’s flaw, if you think that the general idea makes sense, I vote for passing it and then tweaking it. If you just don’t like my structure, then that’s fine.


07-04-2013 22:49:22 UTC

Another problem - This sets Barons above Earl, where Earls are above Barons. This would also need to be fixed.


08-04-2013 00:51:58 UTC

My problem with combat is that I couldn’t quite follow who gets what after a combat. I’ll have to think this one over.


08-04-2013 07:03:54 UTC



08-04-2013 09:46:31 UTC



08-04-2013 11:59:50 UTC

against Overcomplicated.


08-04-2013 12:31:40 UTC


Clucky: he/him

09-04-2013 02:19:45 UTC



09-04-2013 04:41:26 UTC