Forced Realm Splits and Voluntary Realm Mergers

[Geronus]

Yet you know as well as I do that if someone does it for an honest reason, someone else will claim it's for another reason.  Then it becomes one side versus another here.

Which is when the Magistrates can step in. Anaris had the best advice:  Stick to the spirit of the rules. From what I have observed, that's generally all Tom is looking for. Common sense should get you to where you need to be 90% of the time.

[Dante Silverfire]

The spirit of the rules is kind of difficult to stick by, when we aren't even fully sure why realm mergers are prohibited. If the reason was apparent, then some edge cases could be allowable simply because they are still within the spirit of the rules by not being one of the reasons the rule is in place.

This isn't rules lawyering, its me just asking an open question. Which is why this Q/A is here. So I can clear these issues ahead of time.

[Geronus]

The spirit of the rules is kind of difficult to stick by, when we aren't even fully sure why realm mergers are prohibited. If the reason was apparent, then some edge cases could be allowable simply because they are still within the spirit of the rules by not being one of the reasons the rule is in place.

This isn't rules lawyering, its me just asking an open question. Which is why this Q/A is here. So I can clear these issues ahead of time.

That rule is fairly black and white. Every realm merger is a realm merger. Not every secession is a strategic secession.

[Dante Silverfire]

That rule is fairly black and white. Every realm merger is a realm merger. Not every secession is a strategic secession.

I'm not talking about strategic secessions, this isn't a thread about that at least it wasn't intended as such.

Every realm merger might be a realm merger, but not all of them may want to be prohibited. Does that make sense?

[Anaris]

The rule, as it exists today, prohibits all realm mergers that are not reasonably classifiable as surrenders.

[vonGenf]

That rule is fairly black and white. Every realm merger is a realm merger. Not every secession is a strategic secession.

The difference is that secessions are allowed through game mechanics. Therefore the rule is about specifically forbidding a particular type of secession, allowing everything else.

Realm mergers, on the other hand, are not allowed through game mechanic. If you use other game mechanics to go around that limitation and effect a realm merger, then it's still forbidden.

[Dante Silverfire]

The rule, as it exists today, prohibits all realm mergers that are not reasonably classifiable as surrenders.

This I understand.

I'm trying to figure out all the reasons behind that, and if rejoining together a realm which split due to a surrender is allowed. Which no one has really answered thus far.

[vonGenf]

I'm trying to figure out all the reasons behind that, and if rejoining together a realm which split due to a surrender is allowed. Which no one has really answered thus far.

How do you intend to achieve that exactly? There is nothing wrong with the desire to remove Lyonesse from the map and expend Eston, per se. You're allowed to work towards that goal and convince other characters to join you.

When the time comes, if your character is a knight or a Lord, switches his allegiance to Eston, and calls on his friends to do the same, I would not see any problem with that.

If he is a Duke and switch with his whole duchy, one would guess against his ruler's will, that will also be fine.

Both these actions will reinforce Eston greatly at Lyonesse's expense, but would not kill outright Lyonesse. You may even end up with a situation similar to Tulsoma, where a completely unrelated group takes power in your old realm.

The problem I see is if the ruler would willingly step down, or if the ruler would collaborate to ensure the duchy changing allegiance contains all the ressources of the realm so that his rump realm is not viable.

[Dante Silverfire]

How do you intend to achieve that exactly? There is nothing wrong with the desire to remove Lyonesse from the map and expend Eston, per se. You're allowed to work towards that goal and convince other characters to join you.

When the time comes, if your character is a knight or a Lord, switches his allegiance to Eston, and calls on his friends to do the same, I would not see any problem with that.

If he is a Duke and switch with his whole duchy, one would guess against his ruler's will, that will also be fine.

Both these actions will reinforce Eston greatly at Lyonesse's expense, but would not kill outright Lyonesse. You may even end up with a situation similar to Tulsoma, where a completely unrelated group takes power in your old realm.

The problem I see is if the ruler would willingly step down, or if the ruler would collaborate to ensure the duchy changing allegiance contains all the ressources of the realm so that his rump realm is not viable.

The realm is a single duchy. No single duchy change could occur that didn't take the whole realm. (For simplicity's sake we're assuming a duchy has to have a city, even though it doesn't)

I see no problem with a realm that was split against its will rejoining itself at a later date without bloodshed, and recognizing a single sovereign.

[vonGenf]

The realm is a single duchy. No single duchy change could occur that didn't take the whole realm. (For simplicity's sake we're assuming a duchy has to have a city, even though it doesn't)

Game mechanically, the Duke can't bring his duchy with him then. The Lords still can bring their regions.

A Duke could also swear allegiance to Eston, but he would no longer be Duke then, his old duchy would remain empty in the previous realm. That's alright.

The rest of my comment still apply.

[Dante Silverfire]

Okay but why. I see no reasons, simply assertions.

[Indirik]

I'm trying to figure out all the reasons behind that, and if rejoining together a realm which split due to a surrender is allowed. Which no one has really answered thus far.

No, it is not allowed. Peaceful mergers of equals are not allowed. The circumstances that caused them to be separate realms are irrelevant under the current rule. The reason that this is not allowed is something that Tom would have to explain, in order to get the whole story.

[vonGenf]

Okay but why. I see no reasons, simply assertions.

Two realms cannot merge as equal. This is a rule that holds at the level of realms, not characters. Your character is allowed to want one realm to disappear and be absorbed by the other one. You have to internalize, however, that this thought is hostile to the one realm.

If a Lyonessian character is thinking "it would be better for Lyonesse to be a duchy within Eston than a full-blown realm", then that's a very modern idea that has no place in Battlemaster. The line of thought of a medieval noble would rather be "as a knight, I would rather owe allegiance to the King of Eston than the King of Lyonesse".

If you try to play your character, and not play your realm at a meta-level, then there shouldn't be any problems.

[Dante Silverfire]

Okay thank you, then I'd like Tom to perhaps comment on this case.

I realize under the current rules it is NOT allowed. It's specifically a rule change/reasons I'm looking for.

[Eldargard]

I am not complaining anymore. Just stating that I see the concern. You guys have a plan and your plan has resulted in an awesome game. I get the difficulties and have decided to stop whining about it as I could not do any better. Things are good in my book.