Even worse happens when you have a war to fight and some nobles begin to think that you cannot win... then the Dukes just change sides to keep a position doing what they need to do to continue as lord. The excuse!? "I did what I need to keep my people safe"... when in truth we was trying to say: "Honor? I don't care. I like to be Duke..."
I would love to see the Judge just saying: "Thank you for the lands... now, you're banned. We have people with more honor to lead your city, low traitor. Adios, amigo". But it's hard to see when people are just trying to win the game.
You don't get my point, and possibly the entire BM concept.
Why in Tom's holy name should we prevent people from doing something like this (a perfect example of feudal power/politics)? and why give the judge such power?
Just because IG something similar just happened? the Hamadan/Mines ceding wouldn't have been prevented by the Judge in this case anyway(whos the brother of the Lord of the mines).
What i am trying to say is that, in this case for example, the Caligan King could have given the Duke or Margrave of Hamadan a what we used to call something like a bad mark.
If someone breaks an 'oath' or allegiance, the person above the oath breaker can decide if the break of allegiance was honorable or not, resulting in honor and or prestige penalties for the action.
It means everyone can still do what ever they want, betray their king and all, yet if they go against the will of a superior, they will personally suffer from it, not withholding them from doing it.
An !@#$%^& of a superior could also first agree with his vasal changing allegiance, then slander him when he actually does.
We used to have bad marks for this, i suggest to bring them back with a few additions, like giving a sort of final mark when allegiance is changed.
Three good marks used to protect that vassal against judge actions too, which also was really fun and incentive for inter realm conflict.
I didnt like the concept that you needed to give bad marks before kicking a knight out of his estate though.
If i suddenly want to kick out my best and favorite knight in an unsuspected burst of impulse, then let me!
I understand timothy's point that their are no more oaths, that's what i am trying to say.
Oaths should actually be one of the central concepts of this game in my opinion.
You dont go 'shopping' or product comparing for allegiance in the middle ages.
