Replacing Founders of Religions

[Indirik]

personally i still fancy the good old dynamic and relative ranks, as opposed to #numbered ranks

I completely agree. But that's also something that isn't going to happen any time soon. Being able to easily reclaim rank #2 is a simple thing, that actually stands a chance of being implemented.

[Galvez]

Without a founder, rank #2 can not be edited. And due to various reason I think some people would want that possibility.

[Draco Tanos]

 Rank 2 SHOULD have similar mechanics to rank 1 then, including but not limited to changing the name of its own title.  So some religions (Like Ibladesh's faith) aren't stuck with "Guildmaster" or whatever it is, which makes little sense.

[Turner]

Following on from the discussion here http://bugs.battlemaster.org/view.php?id=4813

Executive summary is that if the founder of a religion goes inactive/deletes/dies then the #1 rank is lost forever, as are any other ranks above the level of the next highest member. That members rank also becomes uneditable. Usually it isn't too serious a problem, but its immersion breaking and annoying. There's been suggestions of complicated ways to select a new #1 ranking member, but my suggestion is to keep it simple.

Create a new option for Senior Members at Temples called "assume leadership". When you click the link, it checks to see if there's anyone above you in rank and if there isn't it promotes you, or everyone at your level, to rank #1. On reflection, I prefer the idea of promoting everyone at your level, simply to remove the race-to-click-the-button aspect

I like this idea as well, it makes sense.

Well though out mate :)

[Indirik]

Without a founder, rank #2 can not be edited. And due to various reason I think some people would want that possibility.

Yes, Rank #2 needs the ability to edit itself.

[fodder]

or just clone #1 to #0 and then remove a few powers from #1 that are founder only (whatever distinguish founder from run of the mill leaders).. leaving #1 to be occupied by 1 person only at any time.

[egamma]

or just clone #1 to #0 and then remove a few powers from #1 that are founder only (whatever distinguish founder from run of the mill leaders).. leaving #1 to be occupied by 1 person only at any time.

How is that different from using #1 and #2? Using the existing numbers makes things easier on the developers, I'm guessing.

[cjnodell]

Besides, the only rank that should be mechanically limited to one individual should be that of the founder... Or such is my opinion...

[fodder]

well.. using #1 and #2 means you are effectively losing 1 rank whenever the founder go missing. bear in mind that you are limited to the number of elder ranks

and what happens when you have multiple people in rank #2? do you demote everyone but the leader or do you go with a group leadership?