Message #33254

[Lorgan]

So I was thinking that it would be kind of handy under the new estate system to be able to give guilds or religions an estate in your region.
It would be much easier to fund those institutions and it would increase the sense of patronage that I feel region lords should have over the guilds or temples they have in their region.

Of course to avoid abuse they wouldn't add to the region's efficiency but work more like wild lands or vacant estates? Perhaps they could give other bonuses like a higher conversion rate for temple estates?

Anyway, thoughts?

[Indirik]

It is an interesting idea.

It was quite popular, I understand, for nobles to leave property to the church in their wills. But then such lands were not taxed, as they were church property.

Might be an interesting option if that was possible, and that lands given tot he churches couldn't be taken back by the lord, and they were subject to no taxes, or the greatly reduced taxes they get under the New Estates.

I wonder what kind of balance issues might crop up with this...

[LilWolf]

and that lands given tot he churches couldn't be taken back by the lord

That would be horrible. All it takes is one angry lord to give all his land to a religion and you'd never get it back, thus screwing the region for just about an eternity.

The land is the lords. He can and should always be able to take it back.

[Indirik]

That would be horrible. All it takes is one angry lord to give all his land to a religion and you'd never get it back, thus screwing the region for just about an eternity.

That would be one of those "balance issues" I mentioned.

[Lorgan]

It is an interesting idea.

It was quite popular, I understand, for nobles to leave property to the church in their wills. But then such lands were not taxed, as they were church property.

Might be an interesting option if that was possible, and that lands given tot he churches couldn't be taken back by the lord, and they were subject to no taxes, or the greatly reduced taxes they get under the New Estates.

I wonder what kind of balance issues might crop up with this...

True but it also was a popular practice for lords to seize back those properties and give them as rewards to their bannermen.
It does create potential conflict about these estates though. Knights come and go, but religions and guilds can easily survive dozens of lords, each of whom may have different opinions about said guild or religion. Thus it would give guilds and religions more incentive to meddle in the appointments of lords. After all their funding depends on it.

[fodder]

I wonder what kind of balance issues might crop up with this...

someone grabs a region by whatever means. gives everything to church then gets banned... no one else will be able to get the stuff back from church... short of jihad against that church.

thing about church is.. instead of region lord, they have the religion equivalent... bishoprics, etc.. dotted all over the place..

[Hroppa]

Lords should definitely be able to claim the land back. But the church is going to hate that, and any local peasantry of that faith will be very upset; the trick is to make it sufficiently hard for the lord to claim it back, without making it impossible.

I love this idea. It creates another mechanism for conflict. It gives religion a way to gain power, to create an incentive for people to be involved. And, bonus, it's historical roots are absolutely authentic.

[Chenier]

It is an interesting idea.

It was quite popular, I understand, for nobles to leave property to the church in their wills. But then such lands were not taxed, as they were church property.

Might be an interesting option if that was possible, and that lands given tot he churches couldn't be taken back by the lord, and they were subject to no taxes, or the greatly reduced taxes they get under the New Estates.

I wonder what kind of balance issues might crop up with this...

Indeed, unlike our temples, which now get taxed... Just to incite more people not to bother with them.

[Psyche]

Love it.  Would be better to make an estate a REQUIREMENT for a temple.  The bigger the temple, the bigger the estate needed.  All the income of the estate goes to the temple.  The bigger the estate, thus more people the church governs, the better the conversion rates.  Same effects. when reclaiming the estate as when arresting a priest, only more severe because its outreach will be well beyond heavy hits to morale.

Would make temples strong, but at the same time reduce the number of temples you see.  Would cause more religious friction in realms- who wants to SUPPORT multiple religions for the sake of peace?  This could also help cut back on every realm trying to establish an RPless state religion for security.  Adds realism, and balances itself out.  LOVE IT!

[Indirik]

I can see lots of potential abuses in this, especially for money-funneling/banking purposes. Religions are not intended to be money-makers, or to be able to generate large cash flows without significant donations from the nobility. I wouldn't mind seeing religions able to generate a small but steady cash flow on their own. But I don't think I'd want to see religions become independent financial powerhouses. The game just isn't set up for that kind of thing.

[Bedwyr]

Mm...So long as the religions are taking gold from the realms, rather than creating new gold sources, I see no difficulty with this.  I'm envisioning a Theocracy with a strong, wealthy church and nobles who gain most of their funds from religious grants...I don't think the balance would be an issue so long as the estates, like all estates, can be reclaimed at will by the lord (while triggering the same unrest as trying to close a temple, say) and don't produce any more gold than they would for the realm.

[Psyche]

Make ways to cap the income then.  For example, temple estate efficiency = % of followers.  If a lord is willing to give s significant portion and income to a religion to build a temple, what makes you think he wouldn't have donated under the current system anyways?  Plus, the temple could be taxed just like any other estate, could fall prey to looting, and even maintenance fees could be there.

Any large cash flow IS a donation from a lord anyways.  Plus, with this setup you wouldn't likely see many temples generating high income either- it's too much commitment and risk for any but devout lords.  The only placed you'd see it more prevalent would be where religions are already the dominant force, politically, such as theocracies.

[Psyche]

Here's some more... looting, the temple or region, can take money from the temple.  Also, looting the temple can cause part of the estate to become vacant/wilderness.  Faiths would be forced to use gold to protect their assets.

[Chenier]

Here's some more... looting, the temple or region, can take money from the temple.  Also, looting the temple can cause part of the estate to become vacant/wilderness.  Faiths would be forced to use gold to protect their assets.

Because religions just have so much gold they don't know what to do with it all, right?

However much I disagree with the stance, Tom has said that there wouldn't be a way for lords to automatically fund their temples. Giving temples an estate to get an income from would just be a different way of implementing the old tithe suggestions.

[Ramiel]

This sounds pretty good actually.