War please.

[NoblesseChevaleresque]

I think Penchant meant "What is the the thing that they need to fix?" i.e. what is it about Barca to which you object?

Oh, politically - their dukes conniving to distribute the regions amongst themselves despite previous oaths and fealty, and punishing lords who refuse to comply in breaking oaths, as well as banning nobles without a trial or sufficiently justifiable reasons, as well as their "old guard" mentality which influences banishing Frederick, by Old Guard I don't just mean old nobles by the way, since as Julius pointed out it also had some young ones as well. Further, to stop their political culture of offering large amounts of gold for the deaths of political opponents (Which interestingly shortly after Mendicant expressed his displeasure to this, a large amount of gold in the form of a bounty was placed on his head, amusingly). I'm quite sure there are a few lesser reasons as well, but they don't come to mind.

As for why we declared war, it was mostly due to the slights against Mendicant rather than the lack of progress in the talks, but Mendicant rather became of the opinion of "Well maybe they will be more inclined to take negotiations seriously when I'm occupying Rettleville, we don't want to be dicked around any longer".

[egamma]

Oh, politically - their dukes conniving to distribute the regions amongst themselves despite previous oaths and fealty, and punishing lords who refuse to comply in breaking oaths, as well as banning nobles without a trial or sufficiently justifiable reasons, as well as their "old guard" mentality which influences banishing Frederick, by Old Guard I don't just mean old nobles by the way, since as Julius pointed out it also had some young ones as well. Further, to stop their political culture of offering large amounts of gold for the deaths of political opponents

Why are those of any concern to Auvrandil? Why do you care?

[NoblesseChevaleresque]

Why are those of any concern to Auvrandil? Why do you care?

I'm glad you asked, because that is quite important.

Aurvandil considered Barca to be its closest friend, we weren't allies, but Aurvandil keeps its relations entirely professional and practices relative isolationism. So when this conflict in Barca spills over into Aurvandil, our first reaction is "We don't want to deal with this crap", but then we get fairly convincing stories from multiple lords in Barca attesting to tyranny and corruption, to which they can support it with transcripts of letters, the list of bounties placed on their head, so then Aurvandil says that it will listen to both sides of the story before we do anything. Aurvandil was trying to take the more honourable path in the fate of these regions, than the most politically expedient one. It would be dishonourable and even hypocritical for Aurvandil to be seen as publicly supporting a Republican tyranny, such as what we had to deal with in Madina, and if its the case, how are the lords defecting from Barca any different to the lords who founded Aurvandil to escape Republican Tyranny?

Aurvandil couldn't by its honour or morals return tens of thousands of peasants, near 40,000 square miles of territory back under what could very well be a tyranny.

With Barca on the northern borders, Aurvandil could not stand by and allow another tyrannical Republic to grow out of hand on our very borders, it would be a bad investment, and in the end if it came to pass, Aurvandil would have to send a military expedition to put an end to it. So we decided, the honourable thing to do would be to hand back the lands, but only the condition that we see the impetus for change, and a degree of sincerity in the Barca Republic to assure us, that whilst they had been left astray, they had every intention of returning to being a Republic of benevolence, such as what we cite D'Hara as being. Which is why my demands were so minimal and vague, it's a case of "Do something, anything to change the course you're heading down, and it will convince me Aurvandil can still rely upon Barca to be a stable, honourable and free realm".

[Zakilevo]

So...

You did not want to return those regions and decided to beat Barca so they won't ask Aurvandil to return those regions? A good way to start a war.

Anyway, wars are always good. Keep it up.

[Bael]

Yeah, but then again these defecting players/character (edit: with the exception of Tostig) made the realm so unpleasant to play in, I am almost inclined to say that the current situation is worth it, just so that we could get rid of them. Its very hard to feel at all inspired to do anything in a realm when you know that there are several nobles that are actively hostile and don't give a damn. It totally squashes realm morale and discussion, because as soon as anything is brought up you know that they will become pissy about it, regardless of what it is. No such thing as a logical or pleasant discussion.

Sure, Barca has declined greatly from what I hoped it would be when I first joined (back when it was only one region). It is quite dull (refer to above paragraph). Hard to break the habit of apathy. Rather focus on other characters (effort not equal to possible return, if any). And my character is/was one of the more active nobles.

So...

You did not want to return those regions and decided to beat Barca so they won't ask Aurvandil to return those regions? A good way to start a war.

Anyway, wars are always good. Keep it up.

Yeah..."this is an honour duel" - march in with totally overwhelming force, crush the army, tear down the walls that cost thousands of gold (when Aurvandil has gained thousands of gold from the loan of Evanburg).

Sounds about right 

[Penchant]

Oh, politically - their dukes conniving to distribute the regions amongst themselves despite previous oaths and fealty, and punishing lords who refuse to comply in breaking oaths, as well as banning nobles without a trial or sufficiently justifiable reasons, as well as their "old guard" mentality which influences banishing Frederick, by Old Guard I don't just mean old nobles by the way, since as Julius pointed out it also had some young ones as well. Further, to stop their political culture of offering large amounts of gold for the deaths of political opponents (Which interestingly shortly after Mendicant expressed his displeasure to this, a large amount of gold in the form of a bounty was placed on his head, amusingly). I'm quite sure there are a few lesser reasons as well, but they don't come to mind.

So in other words this crap about there being many different ways to fix it it really not true. The dukes need to let lords choose who to have their oath to, they need to have fair trials, I really don't completely understand what you are saying with the "Old Guard" thing, and unless they are sending letters and sending the money through the bank,  you have no proof who put the bounties on people and thus can't prove payment for attacking  politacal oppenents.

[Bael]

So in other words this crap about there being many different ways to fix it it really not true. The dukes need to let lords choose who to have their oath to, they need to have fair trials, I really don't completely understand what you are saying with the "Old Guard" thing, and unless they are sending letters and sending the money through the bank,  you have no proof who put the bounties on people and thus can't prove payment for attacking  politacal oppenents.

Yeah, I certainly didn't expect Aurvandil to take their claims seriously...several times I was on the verge of writing a letter to Mendicant, explaining the entire saga, but it seemed unnecessary and silly to have to do so. (Also, see prior post about apathy  )

[Indirik]

I can't imagine Mendicant demanding fair trials for nobles, though. I was under the understanding that what Mendicant says goes, period. I.e. if Mendicant thought there was some valid reason to get rid of the lords, they would be out on their ears in seconds, without any kind of trial at all, let alone a "fair" one.

[Penchant]

I can't imagine Mendicant demanding fair trials for nobles, though. I was under the understanding that what Mendicant says goes, period. I.e. if Mendicant thought there was some valid reason to get rid of the lords, they would be out on their ears in seconds, without any kind of trial at all, let alone a "fair" one.

He said that was an issue in Barca so it would be rather hypocritcal of him to do it but I wouldn't be too surprised.

[DoctorHarte]

I can't imagine Mendicant demanding fair trials for nobles, though. I was under the understanding that what Mendicant says goes, period. I.e. if Mendicant thought there was some valid reason to get rid of the lords, they would be out on their ears in seconds, without any kind of trial at all, let alone a "fair" one.

It's more like everyone in the realm agrees with Mendicant's choices, not just because he is High Sovereign but because he explains everything in a logical and reasonable fashion. As for your example, there are a few Lords who consistently cause trouble or rather question the choices of almost all of our governing body. Mendicant also allowed for some of the last Pirates of Madina to come clean and join Aurvandil instead - even allowing them to keep their regions.

[Indirik]

Allowing them to stay around is not the same as giving them a fair trial. Nor is the fact that people agree with him.

(FWIW - I'm not a big fan of IC trials. Just ban the guy and move on.)

[NoblesseChevaleresque]

Does Mendicant need to hold a fair trial?

That would almost imply that Mendicant himself isn't fair, or needs a joint verdict to add legitimacy to the conclusion he comes to. Though, Aurvandil has never needed to hold a trial, the only time we've banned nobles is when it's been a clear act of treason, and a trial wasn't required, and hopefully it stays in that way.

As for our enemies, well again, a trial has never been needed. We give them the chance to accept the High Sovereign's mercy, to lay down their arms and either desist their campaign, join us, or leave the area of conflict entirely, anyone who doesn't, well, has forfeited the High Sovereign's mercy and chooses to fight on accepting the possibility of consequences for their action, which to this point in time has not required a trial to determine what to do with them, it's always clear cut by Aurvandilan standards. Such as when we captured the Grand Doge of Madina, he had forfeited the the High Sovereign's mercy but we released him from prison since he recognised Mendicant as the rightful sovereign of Madina and the Madinian Republic both as illegitimate, and an illegal rebellion against the Monarch of the Madina Territory.

[NoblesseChevaleresque]

So in other words this crap about there being many different ways to fix it it really not true. The dukes need to let lords choose who to have their oath to, they need to have fair trials, I really don't completely understand what you are saying with the "Old Guard" thing, and unless they are sending letters and sending the money through the bank,  you have no proof who put the bounties on people and thus can't prove payment for attacking  politacal oppenents.

No no, there were many different ways.

They could have done literally anything under the sun that somewhat affected the internal mechanism of Barca, and within reason Mendicant would have agreed it was fine. Words can scarcely express just how disinterested Mendicant was in the whole northern marches affair, especially when we had our own Madina City problems to deal with.

[Zakilevo]

The war has already started. Time to focus on beating each other down. Enough talk!

If you have problems, call more allies, talk to other rulers, convince them to aid you.

Good luck to both realms.

[Foundation]

Huh?  I thought the war was already over, Zak...