Remove Royal "unbannable" perk

[egamma]

They aren't against the entire government nor the government system, merely against one person. While if an event happens to give reason for a ruler to be removed, it is much easier to convince people to protest him out instead of doing a rebellion.

The Ruler is the Government.

The thing is, that it IS impossible to remove a Royal from a realm. There is no way to actually remove them from your realm. The only current method that can even be attempted on them is Exile, but why should that noble leave. As Anaris stated earlier, leaving is stupid because Prestige and honor really don't mean anything in this game. A Royal cannot be removed from a realm under any circumstances.

Have you considered simply putting him on ignore, and forbidding everyone in the realm from speaking his name or addressing him? Fine anyone who supports him or acknowledges his existence.

Really? You're not creative (or mean) enough. Two options off the top of my head, I think they may have been mentioned earlier in the thread.
1. Have the lord of his region switch realms. This works best if you can pay them off with a better region on their return.
2. Give away their region. They'll still be in the realm, but they won't have any income. If he's a duke, have his lords switch lieges and then disband his duchy.
3. Put a 1000 gold bounty on his head, and then announce to all infiltrators that any infiltrator caught assassinating him will be released immediately with no repercussions. Notify him that you have done this. Repeat until he leaves the continent.
4. Get together with your ally (or possibly, enemy), and have them declare war on your realm (or you on them, whatever). Continually provide that realm with the location of the royal, so their army can harass him. If he has a region, have them loot it until it rebels. Use your own priests and diplomats to help the region revolt, and have surrounding lords drop their tax rates in order to make his peasants even more unhappy. Refuse to sell him food (or buy his food, depending).

If you're not willing to take these measures, then you don't deserve to get rid of him.


The measures mentioned here may be a violation of the Social Contract. You will need to talk with this person beforehand to explain that this is all IC, and your reasons for doing whatever it is you are going to do.

[Dante Silverfire]

Really? You're not creative (or mean) enough. Two options off the top of my head, I think they may have been mentioned earlier in the thread.
1. Have the lord of his region switch realms. This works best if you can pay them off with a better region on their return.
2. Give away their region. They'll still be in the realm, but they won't have any income. If he's a duke, have his lords switch lieges and then disband his duchy.
3. Put a 1000 gold bounty on his head, and then announce to all infiltrators that any infiltrator caught assassinating him will be released immediately with no repercussions. Notify him that you have done this. Repeat until he leaves the continent.
4. Get together with your ally (or possibly, enemy), and have them declare war on your realm (or you on them, whatever). Continually provide that realm with the location of the royal, so their army can harass him. If he has a region, have them loot it until it rebels. Use your own priests and diplomats to help the region revolt, and have surrounding lords drop their tax rates in order to make his peasants even more unhappy. Refuse to sell him food (or buy his food, depending).

1. This is abuse of game mechanics. Anyone I saw doing this I'd immediately report to the Titans.
2. They are still in the realm.
3. This still requires the noble to leave on their own. You aren't forcing him out. Instead you're dumping tons of gold into endless infiltrator hits which don't actually do anything, since infiltrator assassinations can't even remove people from positions. (I've already asked and no one can remember the last time an infiltrator has done this)
4. I consider this either abuse or against the social contract as you've pointed out. The food part is reasonable but still doesn't remove them from the realm.

[Sacha]

You just don't think big enough. If you really want him gone, there are ways. They will come with a steep price, but they are there nonetheless. If the cost is too high for you, well, maybe you don't want him gone quite badly enough. And then there are just those times where you have to eat the whole !@#$ sandwich and seconds. Welcome to politics. Royals didn't rise to power all on their own, so usually the problem is one you created in the first place. Better think twice before casting a vote next time, eh!

[Dante Silverfire]

You just don't think big enough. If you really want him gone, there are ways. They will come with a steep price, but they are there nonetheless. If the cost is too high for you, well, maybe you don't want him gone quite badly enough. And then there are just those times where you have to eat the whole !@#$ sandwich and seconds. Welcome to politics. Royals didn't rise to power all on their own, so usually the problem is one you created in the first place. Better think twice before casting a vote next time, eh!

There is not a single way to make a royal leave a realm unless they choose to do so themselves. The only methods that could work are abuse of game mechanics.

Please name me one that is both possible and not abuse.

[Sacha]

Destroy the realm and start a new one. That was basically the original idea behind Luria Nova. It was to serve as a new Pian en Luries, eating away at the old one until it was only Alanna sitting by herself in Poryatown.

[Dante Silverfire]

Destroy the realm and start a new one. That was basically the original idea behind Luria Nova. It was to serve as a new Pian en Luries, eating away at the old one until it was only Alanna sitting by herself in Poryatown.

Okay, so do you think that is conducive to positive game behavior whereby the realm is the "team" so, we have to destroy the entire realm just to get rid of a single noble?

Is that toxic for gameplay or beneficial?

[Eldargard]

Destroy the realm and start a new one. That was basically the original idea behind Luria Nova. It was to serve as a new Pian en Luries, eating away at the old one until it was only Alanna sitting by herself in Poryatown.

That sounds effective and fun. What it seems to come down to is support. If you can gain the support of the majority against the Royal, then you need nothing more. Sure, there are no direct means but I rather like that fact. To be fair, my first reaction to this threat was one of agreement. After reading all of these posts, however, I find my mind changed.

[Sacha]

Okay, so do you think that is conducive to positive game behavior whereby the realm is the "team" so, we have to destroy the entire realm just to get rid of a single noble?

Is that toxic for gameplay or beneficial?

Seeing as how the plan had the support of most of the nobility save a few of Alanna's fiercest loyalists, I'd say beneficial. And it's not like it was our first round of scorched earth. Before LN, PeL had already been split down the middle and a whole duchy leveled to get rid of a few entrenched people.

Really, you should focus on preventing the problem of unbannable Royals instead of panicking about what to do once you've run out of options. You don't have to be a mindreader to know if someone might end up being a problem once they have a crown on their head. And if they do become a troublesome ruler and you want them gone, then by Jove, start a rebellion and execute them/kick their ass to another continent instead of giving them a license to make your life miserable later on.

Think ahead!

[Dante Silverfire]

Seeing as how the plan had the support of most of the nobility save a few of Alanna's fiercest loyalists, I'd say beneficial. And it's not like it was our first round of scorched earth. Before LN, PeL had already been split down the middle and a whole duchy leveled to get rid of a few entrenched people.

Really, you should focus on preventing the problem of unbannable Royals instead of panicking about what to do once you've run out of options. You don't have to be a mindreader to know if someone might end up being a problem once they have a crown on their head. And if they do become a troublesome ruler and you want them gone, then by Jove, start a rebellion and execute them/kick their ass to another continent instead of giving them a license to make your life miserable later on.

Think ahead!

You completely disregarded my question. Its not whether or not it was a good decision in that one instance. Its whether or not having to destroy a realm as the only possible recourse is a reasonable thing to include in the game. For all future cases and in general. That is what I believe is toxic.

[vonGenf]

You completely disregarded my question. Its not whether or not it was a good decision in that one instance. Its whether or not having to destroy a realm as the only possible recourse is a reasonable thing to include in the game. For all future cases and in general. That is what I believe is toxic.

Destroying the realm is the only possible recourse to achieve exactly what you want.

Sometimes, you just don't get what you want. You could accept that and play along without destroying the realm.

To get back to Sacha's point, it's not like being unbannable is an arbitrary and capricious "perk". It's something these characters worked hard to obtain. They deserve it.

[Sacha]

Royals have been unbannable for years, maybe even since before I joined BM almost 8 years ago... Why would it suddenly become a problem overnight? You should always make sure you care able to keep a (former) ruler in check, no matter how benevolent they might be, should the need arise.

Desperate times call for desperate measures. You're the one asking for ways to deal with Royals, I gave you one. If one particular Royal is bad enough to prompt a feature request taking away their immunity, then surely they're bad enough to consider wrecking a realm over him.

[Chenier]

So next time, go for a rebellion. IIRC, if you're rebelled against you lose your Royal title even if you're not outright banned by the rebels afterwards.

Are you sure?

I'm pretty sure that if the ruler abdicates willingly, it's quite different than if he is defeated. I'm not sure for what aspects, though. I know you can't reform the government if he steps down, and I'm under the impression he isn't auto-banned either, and wouldn't be surprised if he kept his royal title.

[Dante Silverfire]

If one particular Royal is bad enough to prompt a feature request taking away their immunity, then surely they're bad enough to consider wrecking a realm over him.

This feature request is not based upon one particular royal. It was based upon my thoughts as I discussed these issues with other individuals.

None of it is related to any in-game character related to any characters that I play.

[Sacha]

Are you sure?

I'm pretty sure that if the ruler abdicates willingly, it's quite different than if he is defeated. I'm not sure for what aspects, though. I know you can't reform the government if he steps down, and I'm under the impression he isn't auto-banned either, and wouldn't be surprised if he kept his royal title.

I can speak first-hand about abdicating during a rebellion. You get instantly banned and declared a rogue, and by extent lose your Royal status. Once you know you can't win it's basically a fast-forward button to the end of the rebellion.

[Chenier]

I can speak first-hand about abdicating during a rebellion. You get instantly banned and declared a rogue, and by extent lose your Royal status. Once you know you can't win it's basically a fast-forward button to the end of the rebellion.

Still a nice big "FU" if the rebels were hoping to reform the government.

Never felt right to me that the deposed ruler had that power to decide if the rebels could or couldn't reform the government...