Friendly rebellion - A case for the Titans?

[vonGenf]

Well, here's a suggestion: Let the realm descend into anarchy by failing to elect a ruler. That should be proof right there that no one in the realm wants the current government to continue. Then when anarchy sets in, have someone claim rulership and reform the government.
This is incorrect.

Ok, so it's possible, but I would argue that rebelling is more fun, more immersive, and not unbalancing to the game.

[Indirik]

I think it makes RP sense that a ruler would use the troops at his command to rally the army and overthrow the established order.

Wut? The ruler is the "established order".

[Indirik]

I would argue that rebelling is more fun, more immersive, and not unbalancing to the game.

I would argue that allowing the realm to descend into anarchy is the more appropriate way of doing it, from both an RP perspective and a game mechanics perspective.

Don't like the current government? Then refuse to serve in it. If no one serves in the government, then it de facto no longer exists. Then you can just set up whatever government you want in the power vacuum created by the disappearance of the previous government.

Claiming leadership and then asking your buddy to "grab your sword and come kick me out" is ridiculous.

[Norrel]

Wut? The ruler is the "established order".

Then why isn't he able to change the government system?

[Indirik]

Then why isn't he able to change the government system?

The ruler can change many aspects of the government system, including the way council positions are selected, how long they serve, who gets to vote, etc., the titles for the positions, and how region lords are selected.

At this moment in time, there is no established game mechanism to the basic underlying government. This may change in the future. But it almost certainly will not be as easy as selecting a new form from a drop-down box and continuing on your way. It would probably cause significant upheaval and unrest in the realm.

[Kain]

Well, here's a suggestion: Let the realm descend into anarchy by failing to elect a ruler. That should be proof right there that no one in the realm wants the current government to continue. Then when anarchy sets in, have someone claim rulership and reform the government.

This is incorrect.

Interesting. I didn't think about that. Although I don't know how easy it would be to pull off, especially in larger realms. It might lead to someone at the bottom offering himself, voting for himself and getting elected on one vote and the rest then rebelling against him.

If he then steps down, then they are right back where they started. If not, then they get their government change :p

[JPierreD]

Well, here's a suggestion: Let the realm descend into anarchy by failing to elect a ruler. That should be proof right there that no one in the realm wants the current government to continue. Then when anarchy sets in, have someone claim rulership and reform the government.

Would it not be easier to allow the ruler to change the government type, immediately triggering a rebellion? He would be the rebelling force leader, the milita if any would be the loyal force automatically, and it would work like a normal rebellion when there is no ruler.

It would make sense IC for the ruler of the current regime to violently reform the estate, ending the old government and starting a new one (like a coup for example).

[Anaris]

He would be the rebelling force leader, the milita if any would be the loyal force automatically, and it would work like a normal rebellion when there is no ruler.

In a normal rebellion when there is no ruler, the rebels win instantly with no period of anarchy—and thus no opportunity to change the government.

[JPierreD]

In a normal rebellion when there is no ruler, the rebels win instantly with no period of anarchy—and thus no opportunity to change the government.

We had in Caergoth a King who auto-paused and elections, during which a rebellion started. It took 3 days, like a normal rebellion, and after it succeeded the elections continued, having the rebellious new King ruled very briefly.

Though that was not intended what I am suggesting is not way too unlike it.

[Shenron]

Would it not be easier to allow the ruler to change the government type, immediately triggering a rebellion? He would be the rebelling force leader, the milita if any would be the loyal force automatically, and it would work like a normal rebellion when there is no ruler.

It would make sense IC for the ruler of the current regime to violently reform the estate, ending the old government and starting a new one (like a coup for example).

This is a really good idea. :)

[vonGenf]

This may change in the future. But it almost certainly will not be as easy as selecting a new form from a drop-down box and continuing on your way. It would probably cause significant upheaval and unrest in the realm.

Sure, that's all I ask. It should not be trivial.

[Phellan]

To be fair Cathay is kind of "bugged" as a realm at the moment - it has no Capital actually.   When Anacan left there was no longer a Capital city.   This still remains true even after the rebellion.

I have a character in Cathay, but at the moment I'm undecided if this was just a poorly planned attempt to change goverment systems, or a deliberate abuse of the game mechanics.   I'm leaning towards the former - with 7 nobles left it's hard to not have the entire government in on any change to the Realm that doesn't make the whole thing fishy.    To be fair, Cathay went from huge to. . . a few regions, it's not surprising the last few nobles might contemplate changing the entire Realm as its no longer really the Realm it was previously.

This however, does not mean that the way they tried to change governments was appropriate, given the game mechanics.   Just that their desire to change is understandable.

[Indirik]

To be fair Cathay is kind of "bugged" as a realm at the moment - it has no Capital actually.   When Anacan left there was no longer a Capital city.   This still remains true even after the rebellion.

That's not a bug. There will be no capital until they build a new one, by moving it to their last remaining city. This is the way it works.

[Velax]

To be fair Cathay is kind of "bugged" as a realm at the moment - it has no Capital actually.   When Anacan left there was no longer a Capital city.   This still remains true even after the rebellion.

Azros is the capital listed in the Realm List.

[TDLR]

Yea, the Rebellion was planned and given the blessing of Optimus, in which case, yea, it would have been smarter for him to just step down, but whatever. I think the idea was that they'd be able to change the name of the realm, which they couldn't otherwise? I don't know. I don't think the players were very well versed in what they were doing.

I don't exactly know where the line is between Toupellon's planned secession and the most rebellion in Cathay, but I do know that there isn't much of one. Both were planned with the blessing/knowledge of the ruler, both were coordinated awkwardly well. Anatole even said today "Fair elections? I laugh at that, for none that I know that minted the crown of Cathay took part to them." Boycotting an election (which the ruler won with a paultry 14% of the vote) just to rebel against his rule a few days later seems similarly contrived. Especially when Erandi heard IC at least a month prior that Colasan was planning to secede anyway. Maybe this is a point that should be raised IC, but if Anatole was so interested in Cathay's future and dedicated to her, then why did he and all the other ruling Dukes (save Optimus) run away from Cathay? Why not win the election and, if Optimus was really that despised, banish/exile him...

Also, I don't know why everyone is hating the McGahee family. Isn't that clearly against the rules of the game? I mean, yea, the guy plays many of his characters alike, but it seems everyone is judging Optimus based on Conan when the player has clearly defined IC that they weren't close nor very well related. Seems to me like an abuse to me that pretty much the whole continent is content to not only let slide, but support. Discouraging. I'd hate for Erandi (honorable, well spoken) to be judged off of Carlos (dubious, indignant, near-illiterate...). I'm pretty sure many of us have characters we play differently, and I would hate for the next character I bring around to be judged off of whatever my former character(s) did...

I can't help but look at the whole stretch from Azros to Akanos with suspicion and, honestly, a little disdain.

Maybe I just don't know all the facts.