Remove Royal "unbannable" perk

[Indirik]

Banning for low activity is against the IR, but punishment because they are not doing their job is not against the IR.

That is correct, but it's not what you said. Please be careful in what you advocate. We don't need experienced players advocating banning people from their realms because they have low activity rates.

[Penchant]

That is correct, but it's not what you said. Please be careful in what you advocate. We don't need experienced players advocating banning people from their realms because they have low activity rates.

If read the wrong way my statement could be seen differently but my first statement did say he was logging in just to keep his position, which I take as logging in solely to keep your position and doing literally nothing else, and if repeatedly done would be not doing their job. My statement could have been worded better but I don't believe it to be advocating something against the IRs.

[Norrel]

Why not allow him to be banned, but require the ruler to consent to it? Or have it immediately force a succession?

[Dante Silverfire]

Why not allow him to be banned, but require the ruler to consent to it? Or have it immediately force a succession?

I'm fine with either of those.

However, I think the 2nd one is already in effect. At least on Testing.

[Indirik]

Why not allow him to be banned, but require the ruler to consent to it? Or have it immediately force a succession?

Do you mean "secession"? That was once possible on testing islands. However, it was removed when the good/bad mark system was removed as part of the most recent estate system.

[Penchant]

Why not allow him to be banned, but require the ruler to consent to it? Or have it immediately force a succession?

Perhaps a solution.

That's forcing character action which might not always be wanted.

[Norrel]

Do you mean "secession"?

Yes.

[Ketchum]

And what if he isn't liked? He could be logging in once a week so he doesn't lose his position and kill the game for everyone, which generally makes everyone their enemy.

Do you try infiltrator to assassinate the Duke, taking them out for many days, long enough to remove Dukeship from him? ::)

Well Chenier do you have a suggestion to solve that problem?

I think its an important issue.

Long-timers SHOULDN'T have all of the fluff positions by default. They should be able to be competed over or allowed to turnover.

Hmm, you do have valid point. We cannot wait long enough for old age to kill the old duke who previously was the Ruler, right? Then why do you appoint the Duke in the first place if you know you going have a hard time to remove her or him later on?  8)

[Gustav Kuriga]

I really miss the good/bad mark system. Being able to reward my active knights in a way that showed they were appreciated in a direct manner would be nice.

[Dante Silverfire]

Hmm, you do have valid point. We cannot wait long enough for old age to kill the old duke who previously was the Ruler, right? Then why do you appoint the Duke in the first place if you know you going have a hard time to remove her or him later on?  8)

Who said they were appointed? A ruler can make themselves Duke depending upon government system I believe.

Also, rulers usually have enough popularity to become Duke regardless.

[fodder]

.... isn't this what exile is for?

well, aside from the fact that you get paid in gold when in realm and thus nerfing it a ton. and killing your h/p.. but hey.

-----
solution to lordship.... stab him. auto de fe him. give away the region (this bit sort of doesn't make sense)

solution to dukeship.... get everyone else to flip away from the duchy. disband the empty duchy.

[Dante Silverfire]

solution to lordship.... stab him. auto de fe him. give away the region (this bit sort of doesn't make sense)

solution to dukeship.... get everyone else to flip away from the duchy. disband the empty duchy.

Seriously does stabbing even work? I can't even remember the last time I've seen a wounding last long enough to force someone out of any position. Most stabbings I've seen won't last longer than 3 days and you need 5-7 to abdicate.

[Draco Tanos]

Depends on their age, really.  Because the wounds are more likely to get worse before they get better.

[Dante Silverfire]

Depends on their age, really.  Because the wounds are more likely to get worse before they get better.

No but seriously. When was the last time someone has seen an infiltrator actually pull of a wounding that kept someone out of it long enough to make them lose their positions.

Honestly I think bounties shouldn't be able to be gained unless they're out for at least 5 days.

[Draco Tanos]

Can't honestly recall if Gregor was wounded by an Infy or a skirmish that knocked him out of Dukeship of Westmoor, which allowed me to quickly set up loyalists over the duchy.

I've almost been knocked out of positions due to preaching incidents as well.  Damned Flowists.