improving the game via prison

[pcw27]

I think by game breaking he meant "game ruining" as in ruining it for the person in prison who can't do anything.

Two thoughts.

1. Freeing prisoners by force.

Suppose you sack the enemy capital, you should have a chance to free all your imprisoned realm mates right?

2. Luxuries.

If the Judge is feeling generous, they can grant the imprisoned noble access to the academy. It gives the prisoner more to do during their stay and it can drive roleplay, maybe the Judge will try to flip the enemy noble in a stockholm syndrome type situation.

[Anaris]

1. Freeing prisoners by force.

Suppose you sack the enemy capital, you should have a chance to free all your imprisoned realm mates right?

If there is a battle in the capital of a realm with prisoners, there is a chance for those prisoners to be freed already.

[Tom]

If there is a battle in the capital of a realm with prisoners, there is a chance for those prisoners to be freed already.

Exactly. It's one of the hundred or so non-advertised little features of the game. It's been in there for years.

[egamma]

Exactly. It's one of the hundred or so non-advertised little features of the game. It's been in there for years.

That's because nobody ever sees it work. Can you review the odds of a prison break happening, and maybe increase it?

[Anaris]

That's because nobody ever sees it work. Can you review the odds of a prison break happening, and maybe increase it?

I've seen it work even when a 300CS undead unit attacks the capital and is instantly wiped out.

It's just rare that a battle happens in a capital to start with, and then having that happens to coincide with having prisoners is rarer.

[Tom]

That's because nobody ever sees it work. Can you review the odds of a prison break happening, and maybe increase it?

The odds already are considerably. It's just that battles in capitals are rare.

[Azerax]

That's because nobody ever sees it work. Can you review the odds of a prison break happening, and maybe increase it?

I've had it happen to my characters twice, and was very glad for it.

[Azerax]

I dont see how the proposed system was game-breaking in the first place as long as the judge could read all their letters. there is no advantage to giving out army commands if the judge of the enemy realm can read it, so letting a marshal speak to his realm isnt exactly an unfair advantage on his part.

Personally, I don't think people in prison should be able to send letters at all, with the exception of bribing guards.  Perhaps a letter to the judge asking them to pass it on, but prison is prison.

[Azerax]

I like the theory, bu as with egamma, I see the high-end bands as being awful long. Just think of what would happen inf your 15-person realm got into war, and their top 5 people (all councilors and he duke) got captured in a battle. One-third of their realm would be in prison long enough that the war would essentially be over. Some people may view that as a plus, but I don't really think it is.

I'm not against making prison stays longer than they are for the top people, if those at the bottom get less. But 40 days? If I was looking at that, I'd stop playing my character and just let him pause in prison.

About this line: "it will make things like ransoming your king interesting" - Is this an allusion to allowing the realm to pay the ransom for the imprisoned characters?

40 days is a long time, but I would think capturing an enemy Ruler would be devastating to morale and could end the war.  40 days is long, but damn, you capture the Ruler, it should be devastating to the realm.. maybe 14 days

[Buffalkill]

40 days...that's half a year in BM time.

[Sacha]

I'm sure there are historical pretexts for long imprisonments of rulers. Though I would suggest that higher profile prisoners have fewer restrictions while imprisoned. A ruler would usually be treated far better while imprisoned than a lowly noble.

[Azerax]

I'm sure there are historical pretexts for long imprisonments of rulers. Though I would suggest that higher profile prisoners have fewer restrictions while imprisoned. A ruler would usually be treated far better while imprisoned than a lowly noble.

This was true, some former Roman Emperors were sent to an island as 'imprisonment' and pretty much lived the same lifestyle, they were just removed.  Same thing happened to Napoleon, but he found a way back.

[Tom]

I'm sure there are historical pretexts for long imprisonments of rulers. Though I would suggest that higher profile prisoners have fewer restrictions while imprisoned. A ruler would usually be treated far better while imprisoned than a lowly noble.

As a matter of fact, nobles often enjoyed quite luxurious "imprisonment". Then again, sometimes not. If we had unlimited developer manpower, we could simulate lots of variety.

[Azerax]

As a matter of fact, nobles often enjoyed quite luxurious "imprisonment". Then again, sometimes not. If we had unlimited developer manpower, we could simulate lots of variety.

It occurs to me that we should re-think the prison experience.  Not for implementation for the next 3 or 6 months, but a long term goal.  It is reasonable to expect an enemy ruler would be granted many privileges, and what part does that play in the game?

Tom, I believe you have opened up an entirely new experience.

[Stabbity]

As a matter of fact, nobles often enjoyed quite luxurious "imprisonment". Then again, sometimes not. If we had unlimited developer manpower, we could simulate lots of variety.

As long as they gave an oath not to try and escape or harm their captors they were even allowed to carry their swords while in captivity. It was very common for prisoners to be paroled in this form.