Author Topic: Assigning knights to an army  (Read 14568 times)

Chenier

  • Exalted Emperor
  • ******
  • Posts: 8120
    • View Profile
Re: Assigning knights to an army
« Reply #45: September 29, 2011, 11:12:39 PM »
But they won't be poor. The enforced taxation down the hierarchy will guarantee them some income.

So they'l be rich homeless hobos then.

Still makes them homeless hobos.
Dit donc camarade soleil / Ne trouves-tu ça pas plutôt con / De donner une journée pareil / À un patron

egamma

  • Guest
Re: Assigning knights to an army
« Reply #46: September 29, 2011, 11:16:17 PM »
interestingly, ruler of riombara is a knight of mio dupaki, with an estate to boot. obviously this is carried forth from before the change. question is... is there no backup/cleanup script for this? something similar quite possibly can occur after every election (will see.. election in a few days)

just imagine a lord running for election and wins. theoretically should auto lose his region. but does he in practice?

Needs to be coded still. My suggestion is, if the new ruler is lord of a city/townsland/stronghold, the ruler should become duke if he isn't already--ie, a new duchy be created. Of course, this should follow the existing "ruler lose position" rules.

fodder

  • Mighty Duke
  • ****
  • Posts: 1977
    • View Profile
Re: Assigning knights to an army
« Reply #47: September 29, 2011, 11:50:33 PM »
mind you.. historically, the king of england, as the duke of normandy or wherever was a vassal of king of france... didn't last long, obviously.

much like some of the earls of scotland had holdings in england.
firefox

JPierreD

  • Mighty Duke
  • ****
  • Posts: 1174
  • Hippiemancer Extraordinaire
    • View Profile
Re: Assigning knights to an army
« Reply #48: September 30, 2011, 12:07:52 AM »
mind you.. historically, the king of england, as the duke of normandy or wherever was a vassal of king of france... didn't last long, obviously.

much like some of the earls of scotland had holdings in england.

The King of England was vassal of the King of France, not of a Duke or Lord of England. There is a difference.
d'Arricarrère Family: Torpius (All around Dwilight), Felicie (Riombara), Frederic (Riombara) and Luc (Eponllyn).

Bedwyr

  • Mighty Duke
  • ****
  • Posts: 1762
  • House Bedwyr
    • View Profile
Re: Assigning knights to an army
« Reply #49: September 30, 2011, 05:47:04 AM »
The King of England was vassal of the King of France, not of a Duke or Lord of England. There is a difference.

The King of England was also never a vassal of the King of France.  The Duke of Normandy, Duke of Gascony, Duke of Aquitaine, Count of Nantes, and various other Lords were all vassals of the King of France.  The fact that the King of England happened to be all those Lords at various times did not mean that as the King of England he was in any way a vassal of the King of France.

Battlemaster does not allow nobles to hold positions in multiple realms, thus the situation cannot occur, but it was only in France, not England, that the vassalage took place, and thus isn't analogous because at no point did the Duke of Aquitaine hold the fealty of someone he owed fealty to, because that was his highest (tied for highest) title in the realm of France.
"You know what the chain of command is? It's the chain I go get and beat you with 'til ya understand who's in ruttin' command here!"