BattleMaster Community
BattleMaster => BM General Discussion => Topic started by: Eduardo Almighty on September 17, 2014, 06:32:09 PM
-
My account was blocked by the Titans because of a "placeholder". As it seems, I cannot play a Duke with powers over his own regions and his own people, his oath and !@#$. Now I know how the others felt offended after open a game they played for years to receive a "generic message from the almighty Titans" saying you cannot play. While I cannot care anymore to open BM everyday, when I want to play, I want to be sure I can open the game I devoted a LOT of TIME and EFFORT. Years to become Duke to be kicked by a generic message, I must say... I understand now why they felt insulted.
I will not be hypocritical to say they doesn't failed or that I don't failed, but I failed to see the situation as a placeholder one. You will have to step back and see how many times different people did it in Sirion to give back region for imprisoned Lords instead of using me as a !@#$ing example. Bu hey, nothing is better to give the example with someone with a name instead of a silent Duke that do it without being reported... I don't know if I must laugh or puke.
It's funny how a small group of persons can take a situation and ruin your gameplay or your will to devote at least one more minute to the game you played for years. I don't even have a Magistrate or a "Court" to defend myself, just the forum to "explain" myself -- and protest, of course -- as a spoiled child. You must review your system if you care with your PEOPLE. If you consider them or if they are useless at their first error.
Now what? I must be happy, wait three days to get back? Be appointed again or not to be appointed again... in any way, I will have to play everyday worried with a report, stepping in eggs here and there, without to say that after that, how do you think they will see the character I built for years be kicked out as nothing giving orders again!? I care less how they will see the player, while it's a true concern as well.
Maybe it's finally time to leave BM... maybe the Titans can find some fun playing alone.
-
A generic message? Wasn't the Titan's message regarding the judgment provided to you? It should be.
-
I was referring to the last part. Anyway, you cannot use the word Judgment when there is no defense. This is a punishments, plain and simple.
-
Bye Eduardo. It has been pleasure playing with your characters :)
-
The worst part is had to swallow it because you still have a desire to finish something.
-
Oh you are not actually leaving? That's good. So why did you make a placeholder anyway?
-
I don't know yet, not before return to the game. Not because of the game anymore, but because of my personal written work inside the game.
And I DIDN'T. At least not as we know placeholders. The Countess of Montijo was arrested... as usual ,we give back the position. EVERYONE knows that. However, she was imprisoned until the result of a election where a Lord was elect with 3 votes. Erik requested him to leave... he ignored. Erik sent an order asking him to leave and he did. Now what? I must change the character's behavior to please a small group of persons I even know (the Titans) ??? No one appointed him to be a placeholder... that was a situation and Erik reacted to it as his behavior. This is roleplaying game, right!?
Maybe not.
-
The Countess of Montijo was arrested... as usual ,we give back the position. EVERYONE knows that.
Riombara used to do that, too. For years. But Riombara changed its laws because they created situations that required placeholders, which are prohibited.
You don't get to have realm laws supersede the game's rules.
It doesn't matter how many people "know" what you do, or how long you've done it—if it's against the game's rules, it's got to stop.
Finally, if you'd just gently reminded the person in the position of the realm's laws, there's a good chance you wouldn't even have been removed from your positions, let alone gotten a 3-day account lock (And it is just 3 days; your account isn't permanently locked). But you didn't. You threatened to run for Judge specifically in order to ban them if they didn't step down.
That's so, so very wrong.
-
Erik did it, Anaris. You know the difference, I hope so. He is a character acting as his behavior. Implying "I" did it, that would be OOC.
-
Erik did it, Anaris. You know the difference, I hope so. He is a character acting as his behavior. Implying "I" did it, that would be OOC.
Yes, I get that. It's a convenient shorthand, and doesn't change the issue. When the rules of the game are involved, it doesn't matter whether it's something that you do IC or OOC—characters can't break RL rules, only players can, and this is a rule that can only be broken IC in the first place.
Either way, that's a semantic matter, and a distraction from the real issue.
-
Good roleplaying should never hurt the game. And it can never justify breaking the rules.
It's cool that you try to give depth and distinctive personality to your character, but don't forget that you as a player are still the one in control. Once the division between your personality and the one of your character starts disrupting the game you have to alter character's decisions in the interest of the community.
As a final arguement, remember that your relationships with other players and DMs are way more important than your character's internal consistency.
-
If you don't want empty lordships to be decided by elections, then why do you have elections? We have been saying for *years*, as long as I can remember, that whoever wins an election is the "rightful" holder of that position. If you don't want them to be elected, then don't hold elections.
If you've been doing this for years, then you've been doing it wrong for years. The Titan's don't actively police realms, searching for rules violations. They only act on things that are reported to them. Apparently someone has taken offense to the practice, and reported it. So, adjust and move on. If that requires your realm to change, then change. You're not doing it to "please" anyone. You're doing it to comply with the rules of the game.
-
I didn't it with intention to hurt the game. I even know that would be considered a placeholder position. I have the blame? Well, good. I continue to see the "report" and the Titans as a weapon for certain players to kick another ones? Yes, more now than ever. Mainly after see some messages...
-
I didn't it with intention to hurt the game.
99% of the people who break the game's rules don't do it with the intention to hurt the game. They do it because they think it's what's best for their realm, or for their character.
I even know that would be considered a placeholder position. I have the blame? Well, good. I continue to see the "report" and the Titans as a weapon for certain players to kick another ones? Yes, more now than ever. Mainly after see some messages...
I'm sorry if you feel that way. However, this report could not have hurt you if you were not, in fact, breaking the game's rules. And I guarantee you that most people in the game—including those in positions of power—are not breaking the game's rules on a regular enough basis that anyone with a grudge could simply report them and get them removed from power.
I understand it's comforting to think of it in those terms—that this was purely a power-play by someone who dislikes your character—but I'm afraid that just doesn't wash. You've been in the game far too long not to know better.
-
I like you man, think you're a good player, but from what I've seen here, yea that was breaking the placeholder rule. Even if its unintentional, it happened. Take your lumps, and I hope to see you back at it in three days.
-
99% of the people who break the game's rules don't do it with the intention to hurt the game. They do it because they think it's what's best for their realm, or for their character.
I'm not 99%. I'm one and my case is my case. I didn't it because I felt it's best for the realm or the character, but because of his behavior. OK. I failed and I apologize for that. I'm still angry.
I understand it's comforting to think of it in those terms—that this was purely a power-play by someone who dislikes your character—but I'm afraid that just doesn't wash. You've been in the game far too long not to know better.
Not, it's not comforting at all. But who really cares? I just want to be sure now if Erik can be reappointed as Duke once again or if that will be considered a placholder as well, since I (the player) was punished. If this is the case, there's little or nothing to do...
-
If nobody is appointed to the position during your absence, it will not violate the placeholder rule if you receive it back. I don't think you'll even lose it unless your positions were stripped too.
-
That was...
-
I just want to be sure now if Erik can be reappointed as Duke once again or if that will be considered a placholder as well, since I (the player) was punished. If this is the case, there's little or nothing to do...
As with most people removed from positions due to breaking rules, he is prohibited from seeking the position again for a while—in this case, 30 days, which is exactly the same as the other character who recently broke the placeholder rule (a case which we will be writing up a summary of for the Wiki shortly).
If the person who takes the position of Duke of Avamar in the interim states that he is doing so in order to hold it for your return, he will find himself removed from it as well. If he doesn't, but still steps down as soon as your 30 days are up and you are immediately reappointed...well, let's say that we'll certainly be looking at that very hard.
If you're only interested in remaining in the game if that one character of yours can be Duke of Avamar forever, then I'm afraid we're going to have a problem with you anyway. No one character is ever entitled to retain a given position, no matter how long or hard they worked for it, no matter how long they've held it, no matter how big a tantrum they throw if it's taken away from them. If that policy means that we're going to lose most of our long-time players...well, then, that probably means that BattleMaster deserves to fail, if it's only managed to attract spoiled, entitled, immature people like that to stay.
Life is change. If you can't accept any change in the status of any given character without it ruining your BattleMaster experience entirely, then I'm afraid you've let the lines between IC and OOC blur too much. I recently retired a character I created in the spring of 2004, who had been a Duchess for a long time. Now someone else holds her positions. Earlier, I retired Delvin, who had ruled Riombara (on and off) for years. These were hard decisions, because the characters had a lot of history, but I never, ever want to be someone who holds a position just to hold onto it, without using that position to contribute fun and energy. That is one of the things that is most damaging to the game.
-
You're fast to judge unh!?
-
You're fast to judge unh!?
If you'll note, I qualified my judgements with "if you're only..."
I do not know your mind. If that is not, in fact, the way you feel, then those words do not apply to you.
However, I will not hold back from stating my belief that people who feel and act that way are harming the game by it.
-
That was to know the rules to avoid break them again. Thanks for the answer, that was what I was seeking, not a judge based on "If you're only..."
You know, I must think what I will do with the character if I decide to stay and continue improving the game without stupid mistakes as the last one.
-
They say passion works in both ways :o
Eduardo, I am sure Sirion will find a quick replacement for Erik mwuaahahahah Okay jokes aside, why don't you talk to Ecthelion after you return? He is after all the only one with enough power to appoint people around. Or maybe Erik can finally give his son the ducal seat instead of hugging it forever like Ecthelion.
-
I'm sure they will. And while you gave me an alternative I already thought about, I think that would be lame on my part to recover the position... and that would be seen as another way to circumvent the rules.
-
I'm sure they will. And while you gave me an alternative I already thought about, I think that would be lame on my part to recover the position... and that would be seen as another way to circumvent the rules.
This is where we get into a little bit of a grey area:
After the 30 days are up, it's not forbidden for Erik to seek to regain his position. However, if he is given it back immediately after the 30 days are up, that would certainly be viewed with suspicion—not enough to result in another Titan judgement against him or the ruler, I would say, but enough to make the Titans less likely to be lenient if Erik were ever reported for something else in a case that was less than fully clear.
Unfortunately, it's mostly a matter of intent, which is something only you can truly know for sure, so the Titans need to attempt to determine intent from words and actions.
-
Unfortunately, it's mostly a matter of intent, which is something only you can truly know for sure, so the Titans need to attempt to determine intent from words and actions.
Then you make judgments based on guesses!? Great. Because of that I prefer the Magistrates instead of the Titans. You don't care with intents or the entire situation, but to punish and hopes the people will understand their fault instead of be pissed off and leave the game because of it.
PS: I understand I broke the rule... and was punished for that. But when you talk about try to guess the intents... this is NUTS.
-
I assume they don't just guess. They probably check more than that.
-
Huh? Eduardo, You totally misunderstood what he said.
-
That's ok.... after some beers, Erik will return, run for Judge until he win and banish the actual Judge... if that is not against the rules as well. Maybe get her Duchy instead of Avamar.
-
Then you make judgments based on guesses!? Great.
<sarcasm>Why, yes, I just totally randomly guess whether your intent breaks the rule or not.</sarcasm>
Don't be silly. It's not guesses—it's based on reading the messages and looking at the actions of the people, combined with whatever general knowledge of their personalities we have, and coming to a consensus and conclusion based on all this information.
The Magistrates did exactly the same thing, I promise you. They were enforcing exactly the same rules the Titans are, after all, and none of them were any more psychic than I am (or if they are, none of them ever let on!).
If you see careful consideration of a person's history, words, and actions, and drawing conclusions based on that, as being the same thing as "guesses"...well, then, I'm afraid you're never going to be happy with some of BattleMaster's rules.
However, I would remind you that this is all regarding the hypothetical situation of Erik being given his position back some time after the 30-day limit expires, not his removal from the position. That was all based on very clear evidence of word and action, not guessing or fuzzy educated guesses or anything of the sort regarding intent.
-
Maybe get her Duchy instead of Avamar.
The prohibition against regaining the lost position applies to all Duchies for those 30 days.
-
Anaris,
Be a good Judge and avoid it. Keep your sarcasm for yourself. I don't need it right now. I don't !@#$ care with the position anymore... it was stripped because of something out of game.
-
The beauty about breaking the rules is intent doesn't really matter. Otherwise everyone would just use it as a defense. "Oh I know I broke the law but my intentions were good!"
You should try that line in court sometime, see how it works out.
-
The beauty about breaking the rules is intent doesn't really matter. Otherwise everyone would just use it as a defense. "Oh I know I broke the law but my intentions were good!"
You fail to understand. That's my fault. I, the player, went against the rules. The character did what he thinks right in his position of power (right or wrong, he didn't care... he must have - or at least he believes it - power over his regions). If you want to imply that character must know the !@#$ing social contract, put them on it! Also, if you will say my character must know it because it's played by the player, forget the !@#$ing Roleplay games.
It's the same about Tournaments: "Hey.... you character cannot tell a word against it in game" "Why?" "'Cause he may now about the social contract! !@#$ your character and what he think about it, let's attend the tournament!"
-
You fail to understand. That's my fault. I, the player, went against the rules. The character did what he thinks right in his position of power (right or wrong, he didn't care... he must have - or at least he believes it - power over his regions). If you want to imply that character must know the !@#$ing social contract, put them on it! Also, if you will say my character must know it because it's played by the player, forget the !@#$ing Roleplay games.
The character can think what he wants. But you, the player, are not allowed to make the character do things that are against the game rules. And the character cannot do anything that you do not make them do, so they can only do things against the game rules if you make them.
Basically, you just need to think about these rules as being, for the world of BattleMaster, like gravity is for our world. They are fundamental constants. They are true everywhere, for everyone, and always have been. So in that light, what you are suggesting is that Erik should be able to say, "Hah! I am so powerful, I will fly from this cliff to that one over there!" And then run off the cliff, and expect not to fall 1000 feet to the ground.
But what happened was that he did fall 1000 feet to the ground. And he's lucky he's alive, and is now under the best medical care in Avamar, and his whole family is at his bedside for the next 3 days, and he will be unfit to hold high office for a month.
-
Yes... while compare it with gravity sounds stupid for me, that's ok. I will wait.
-
but I never, ever want to be someone who holds a position just to hold onto it, without using that position to contribute fun and energy. That is one of the things that is most damaging to the game.
Hallelujah! Say it, Brother!
-
without using that position to contribute fun and energy
Hallelujah. Find someone that invested so much and contributed so much fun and energy... just take a look at my Wiki. You will find 30% of Erik there. Talk with the people around him.. you would find another 70%. I was just angry... now I'm fine. Erik will continue to punish Perdan, after that became Priest once again until retire.
He helped so much people that that is not a problem to find someone great to take his former position and did it as great as he did -- while I doubt... so many records 8)
-
My own comment was meant in general (or more specifically, to a certain type of player), and not you.
My time in Sirion showed you are far from being a problem in this regard
-
Sorry and thank you then!
-
Perhaps the Wiki entry about place holders should be updated to make it clear that elections are binding. Eduardo is a long term player, if he was unaware of the infraction then surely others would be as well.
-
Perhaps the Wiki entry about place holders should be updated to make it clear that elections are binding. Eduardo is a long term player, if he was unaware of the infraction then surely others would be as well.
The rule says:
Nobles holding placeholder positions are prohibited. It is not acceptable for Keplerina to hold a position for Kepler and step down when Kepler is able to take the position again. This applies for all positions.
It does not mention elections, and it's fine that way. It covers all cases.
-
Tell it as you want. He was not there holding the position. By the social contract, I'm wrong. In game, you will have to die before convince me. He was not there holding anything. Perdan failed to release the prisoner in time. He was elected with 3 votes. The former Countess asked her position back based on laws written by Erik, agreed by the Council like a thousand years before. He acted as a people in a position of power. He did it as subtle as Erik? He did. I would never apologize for his behavior, just for mine as player and for what I was punished for (he as well). He was never appointed there to hold a position. He was elected and ordered to leave. Call it another name if you want, but he's not a placeholder, just a victim of a crazy Duke with power in his old head accomplishing the laws of his old realm. After all it's a roleplaying game.
Celine was fast to ensure a punishment, but never to change the law before it as a Judge. Just old things that no one cares until the Titans appears to illuminate our world with a yellow message.
-
By the social contract, I'm wrong. In game, you will have to die before convince me.
So you actually realize you've broken the rules as a player and was punished for that as a player?
In this case I personally can not understand the logic behind your complaint. Can you explain?
-
Excuse me if I expressed it wrong... I would no entitled to that as player, so, not as character (that's the general opinion, since I was punished).
Erik did what he did because he's a character designed to act as a person with his own personality, taking his own decisions. That's all about IC/OOC and how you differentiate it. And since they are co-related, here we are.
-
The rule says:
Nobles holding placeholder positions are prohibited. It is not acceptable for Keplerina to hold a position for Kepler and step down when Kepler is able to take the position again. This applies for all positions.
It does not mention elections, and it's fine that way. It covers all cases.
What is clear to you, may well not be clear to others. The reasons real life law has precedents is the acknowledgement that judgements further elaborate on written laws and provide greater detail. Not every one here has the same level of English comprehension and we do need to ensure that you don't need to have played for 10 years and have a superb memory to know all the ins and outs of a rule.
More to the point though I was referring to specifying that elections are binding in terms of "rightful" Lords and realm should not make laws that allow Dukes or whomever to then declare they are not and the real Lord should be installed. That "real" lord could be the old position holder or someone else entirely, either way it challenges the concept that elections are reasonably binding.
-
A character is a construct. It is devoid of autonomy. Everything it does, says, or thinks is at the whim of its creator.
Yes, there's such a thing as roleplaying. But experienced roleplayers know full well that roleplay is not an excuse that forgives everything. Simply put, if a character is an !@#$%^&, it's because there's a player behind him that wants to be an !@#$%^&.
However, with the rule, I'm with De-Legro. I don't consider it very clear in this case. Nor do I consider this application to be similar with most previous position holder verdicts. The placeholder rule is typically involved for temporary appointments "We need a lord for X so that he may recruit milita, but Y will be made lord again when he can" and such. It has not been traditionally invoked in cases where people in positions of power do not agree with the result of an election. In fact, I think the only such case I can recall was many many years ago, when a realm (Melhed?) wanted to ignore the game's referendum because they had come up with their own more complicated lordship deciding system. And this was back before one could customize these government settings.
I'm not even sure I agree with the verdict. When realms are divided into competing factions, when the dominant faction loses the rulership due to some similar event, they will also usually do all in their power to remove whoever was elected. Is this normal politics, or is this a violation of the game's placeholder rules?
-
Lords can kick Knights and close estates. Dukes can appoint Lords, Lords can kick knights, Dukes cannot kick Lords... nor Knights .......... Duke is less than Lord in this kind of decision. Hierarchy!? I cannot open BM now, but in Hierarchy, you are related to your Lord, to your Duke and the Ruler, in the highest stance. Duke is the midway... sounds good, but you cannot manage anything. The way? The way Erik always did in a last stance... banish. Too much used to be Judge, when the game says you can ban anyone simple if you want to do it. Face the consequences.
He faced.
-
I'm not even sure I agree with the verdict. When realms are divided into competing factions, when the dominant faction loses the rulership due to some similar event, they will also usually do all in their power to remove whoever was elected. Is this normal politics, or is this a violation of the game's placeholder rules?
That has nothing to do with this case. Here, there was a law of the realm that Lords who lost their positions in war were required to be reappointed to them. A Lord lost his position, a new Lord was elected, the old Lord was released from prison, and Erik not only demanded that the new Lord step down, he threatened to run for Judge just so he could ban the new Lord if he didn't step down. There was no battle between factions
I cannot fathom how one could think the placeholder rule could reasonably be applied to straightforward power plays, especially with regard to the ruler position.
-
My worries is that people said NO with the TITANS.
I would do different... but that is it.
-
Lords can kick Knights and close estates. Dukes can appoint Lords, Lords can kick knights, Dukes cannot kick Lords... nor Knights .......... Duke is less than Lord in this kind of decision. Hierarchy!? I cannot open BM now, but in Hierarchy, you are related to your Lord, to your Duke and the Ruler, in the highest stance. Duke is the midway... sounds good, but you cannot manage anything.
The Ruler can't kick Dukes, either.
In the history of the game, there have only been 2 ways to reliably remove a Lord from position without banning him: one of those was the "question nobility" option, which was removed for various kinds of abuse, and the other is the auto da fe option for priests, which has limited applicability.
This should indicate to you that the idea that Dukes "should" be able to remove Lords from their positions on a whim is not based on anything from BattleMaster's history.
I do think that Dukes need more interesting options, but that doesn't mean that they're not already a very powerful position. The idea that Dukes being unable to kick Lords out of their positions makes them somehow inferior to Lords, or deeply unbalanced, is simply ridiculous. For one thing, if you like the powers of a Lord, and you're a Duke, you can just...make yourself a Lord.
-
My worries is that people said NO with the TITANS.
I'm afraid I don't understand what you mean with this.
-
No one said a thing in character until I received the verdict. Not a single word since the one of the bullied Eldarion saying "I lost your request, sorry, I will obey your order". And reading it now, by my own words, I would not be bullied... but very angry. I can understand why I was punished for not playing as a friend. But Erik is a construct and he is an !@#$%^&. A douchebag. Call it as you want. If you will consider every threat he made, every stupid thing he said... well... you will face some bad times.
Unfortunately, this time he went too far while I thought he usually acted as his behavior.
-
No one said a thing in character until I received the verdict. No one word since the one of the bullied Eldarion saying "I lost your request, sorry, I will obey your order". And reading it now, by my own words, I would not be bullied... but very angry. I can understand why I was punished for not playing as a friend. But Erik is a construct and is an !@#$%^&. A douchebag. Call it as you want. If you will consider every threat he made, every stupid thing he said... well... you will face some bad times.
No one is saying Erik is an !@#$%^&. (He might be, he might not; I don't know, and I suspect Chénier doesn't, either.)
What we're saying is this:
Everything—every single word and action—that happens in the game—that happens in-character—is totally, completely, 100% controlled by us out of character. Erik is not a real person. He is a bunch of entries in the BattleMaster database, and ideas in your head. You are totally in control of everything Erik does. He cannot do anything by himself. That means that you are responsible for actions that "Erik takes" breaking rules. You can talk till you're blue in the face about what is "right for RP" or what was "natural for him to do." There are actions that our characters would, if they were real people, absolutely do, but they can't, either because BattleMaster simply doesn't have code that lets it happen (such as wandering around in one region while our units fight in another), or because they are against BattleMaster's rules (such as ordering people not to go to a tournament hosted by a hated enemy with the stated purpose of raising gold to fight your own realm).
It doesn't matter how logical and obvious these actions would be to our characters. Because of BattleMaster's rules and the limitations of the game's code, many actions are either impossible or forbidden. If you want a totally freeform roleplaying game, BattleMaster is not it, and never has been. If you want to keep playing BattleMaster, you must keep your characters' actions within the rules, no matter how much the character might "want" to do something that breaks them.
-
Gravity. ok.
-
The rule says:
Nobles holding placeholder positions are prohibited. It is not acceptable for Keplerina to hold a position for Kepler and step down when Kepler is able to take the position again. This applies for all positions.
It does not mention elections, and it's fine that way. It covers all cases.
I have to say that from my perspective, that rule and my understanding of this situation do not line up 100%. The rule states that a character can not hold positions for another character and willingly make way for that other character to get it back once the mechanics allow. It doe not say it is not ok for other characters to expect or demand that such a thing occur. It says nothing about other characters leaning on Keplerina with hopes of her standing aside. It only says that Keplerina is not allowed to play the role of place holder.
When I try to logically apply the rule as written, the player who's character took the lordship and then stepped down should have been the one punished. That player chose to make their character a place holder and that character is the only one that broke the rule.
I am not saying that this is how the situation should have been handled but I am saying that the rule, as written, does not seem to match how the rule was applied n this circumstance. If I come to this conclusion than others might too and this certainly prevents me from agreeing that the rule is perfectly clear and unambiguous as written. No written rule will ever be completely unambiguous but this rule, in my mind, certainly invites misunderstanding.
-
I have to say that from my perspective, that rule and my understanding of this situation do not line up 100%. The rule states that a character can not hold positions for another character and willingly make way for that other character to get it back once the mechanics allow. It doe not say it is not ok for other characters to expect or demand that such a thing occur. It says nothing about other characters leaning on Keplerina with hopes of her standing aside. It only says that Keplerina is not allowed to play the role of place holder.
When I try to logically apply the rule as written, the player who's character took the lordship and then stepped down should have been the one punished. That player chose to make their character a place holder and that character is the only one that broke the rule.
I am not saying that this is how the situation should have been handled but I am saying that the rule, as written, does not seem to match how the rule was applied n this circumstance. If I come to this conclusion than others might too and this certainly prevents me from agreeing that the rule is perfectly clear and unambiguous as written. No written rule will ever be completely unambiguous but this rule, in my mind, certainly invites misunderstanding.
The punishment was for trying to FORCE someone to be a place holder, not for them fulfilling the role. It amounted to in character bullying that would have lead to a character breaking a rule had they complied. Think of it like Inciting Violence rather then personally committing that violence.
-
I totally get why the punishment happened. I am simply saying that, from my reading, the rule specifies that one is not allowed to take, hold and then turn over a position to insure the position makes it's way back into the original character's hands. That was not done by Eduardo and suggesting that he violated that rule as written seems a bit off. If you want a rule against conspiring, threatening or indulging in any placeholding, the rule should state as much because it clearly does not say that now - at least when I read it.
-
I totally get why the punishment happened. I am simply saying that, from my reading, the rule specifies that one is not allowed to take, hold and then turn over a position to insure the position makes it's way back into the original character's hands. That was not done by Eduardo and suggesting that he violated that rule as written seems a bit off. If you want a rule against conspiring, threatening or indulging in any placeholding, the rule should state as much because it clearly does not say that now - at least when I read it.
None of the rules state that. I'm guessing it was assumed to be self evident that attempting to force or trick someone else into breaking rules, would you know be not a great thing to do.
-
It amounted to in character bullying that would have lead to a character breaking a rule had they complied.
The character in question did comply before the Titan judgment was handed.
-
That has nothing to do with this case. Here, there was a law of the realm that Lords who lost their positions in war were required to be reappointed to them.
There wasn't any law of the realm stating that or anything remotely close, and there still isn't. Erik was not Judge, and he probably knew the Judge would not take his side in this case. He threatened to run for Judge to ban Eldarion anyway, he conceivably could have done that and won.
-
There wasn't any law of the realm stating that or anything remotely close, and there still isn't.
Really? If that's so, then it makes Erik's already indefensible position even weaker.
He certainly seemed to think there was such a law, though. I think he even said on IRC that he wrote it into the realm's laws himself, at an earlier point when he was Judge.
-
He was never appointed there to hold a position. He was elected and ordered to leave. Call it another name if you want, but he's not a placeholder, just a victim of a crazy Duke with power in his old head accomplishing the laws of his old realm. After all it's a roleplaying game.
That's a reasonable way to see it - honestly, I thought the same at first. Since it seems the Titans think differently, then that clarifies the rule.
The way I see it post-judgment, the issue is not so much that you ordered Eldarion to leave but that you meant to give back the region to the previous Lord - if you had simply hated Eldarion's guts for some random reasons, it would have been OK.
Celine was fast to ensure a punishment, but never to change the law before it as a Judge. Just old things that no one cares until the Titans appears to illuminate our world with a yellow message.
I'm not sure what you mean by that.
-
Really? If that's so, then it makes Erik's already indefensible position even weaker.
Why? He was the Duke, he sent an order to his vassal. You don't need laws for everything.
If Eldarion had turned to me (I'm the Judge of Sirion), I would have suggested him to evade that order by switching allegiance to my own Duchy. But he didn't, so that's that.
-
Why? He was the Duke, he sent an order to his vassal. You don't need laws for everything.
Because it allows him to say, "But I was just following the law, that we've had for years, and we've used in exactly this same way dozens of times." Which was what I had understood him to already be saying.
That's not a viable defense for breaking the rules, but it at least makes doing so more understandable.
-
The way I see it post-judgment, the issue is not so much that you ordered Eldarion to leave but that you meant to give back the region to the previous Lord - if you had simply hated Eldarion's guts for some random reasons, it would have been OK.
Yes, exactly.
The primary purpose of the placeholder rule is to make sure that once someone loses a position of power to someone else, it stays lost at least for a good while.
In fact, I would go so far as to say that if Erik had, from the start, aggressively pushed Eldarion to step down because he didn't like him, and he did like Rhiannon and wanted her to have the Lordship, rather than quoting some "tradition" of returning lost lordships to the person who used to hold them, the Titan ruling might well have been different. It might not have, but the discussions surrounding it would certainly have been different, as that would have been much closer to the line of a power play, rather than a clear, straightforward case of getting the original position holder reappointed just because "that's what we do."
-
That has nothing to do with this case. Here, there was a law of the realm that Lords who lost their positions in war were required to be reappointed to them. A Lord lost his position, a new Lord was elected, the old Lord was released from prison, and Erik not only demanded that the new Lord step down, he threatened to run for Judge just so he could ban the new Lord if he didn't step down. There was no battle between factions
I cannot fathom how one could think the placeholder rule could reasonably be applied to straightforward power plays, especially with regard to the ruler position.
Run for election means campaigning against someone who already holds the position and apparently disagrees with his intent. There's a power play in itself, there.
Giving a duke the ability to remove lords is something that has, to my knowledge, been seen favorably by the devs for some time, now (if a proper way of doing it can be thought of).
The character in question was not, from what I can tell, stripped of his lordship. The duke complained... that's it. The character can join another duchy if he wants. If the duke does manage to somehow ban the character, that character can bring the region with him to another realm.
I have a hard time seeing this as anything else than a power struggle. Someone in power who disagrees with the votes of others. It's not as if the duke went out to appoint someone "until the proper lord comes back", just to cancel the election. That the realm had a law or not on the topic seems irrelevant to me, because nobody agreed to place someone temporarily, nor did anyone seek to do so. It is hard to see this as a case of a placeholder, when no one was put in place specifically to hold the seat for someone else.
If the intent of the rule is to make game elections binding, then the rule needs to be rewritten to state as much. But that would be stepping into dangerous grounds, because many power struggles and aspects of politics revolve around disagreements over election results.
-
Run for election means campaigning against someone who already holds the position and apparently disagrees with his intent. There's a power play in itself, there.
Giving a duke the ability to remove lords is something that has, to my knowledge, been seen favorably by the devs for some time, now (if a proper way of doing it can be thought of).
The character in question was not, from what I can tell, stripped of his lordship. The duke complained... that's it. The character can join another duchy if he wants. If the duke does manage to somehow ban the character, that character can bring the region with him to another realm.
I have a hard time seeing this as anything else than a power struggle. Someone in power who disagrees with the votes of others. It's not as if the duke went out to appoint someone "until the proper lord comes back", just to cancel the election. That the realm had a law or not on the topic seems irrelevant to me, because nobody agreed to place someone temporarily, nor did anyone seek to do so. It is hard to see this as a case of a placeholder, when no one was put in place specifically to hold the seat for someone else.
If the intent of the rule is to make game elections binding, then the rule needs to be rewritten to state as much. But that would be stepping into dangerous grounds, because many power struggles and aspects of politics revolve around disagreements over election results.
There's no factionalism here, no disagreement over politics. The only disagreement is over who should actually have that title—there's nothing larger behind it.
You're trying to make this out to be some kind of conflict between different political factions in the realm, with the lordship as part of the battleground between them, but so far as I can tell, it's absolutely nothing of the sort.
So far as Erik, the character, was concerned, the lordship was rightfully Rhiannon's because Sirion law and/or tradition stated that a Lord who lost their Lordship through capture in battle would have it returned. Eldarion was elected when the automatic referendum finished, and was in the way of Rhiannon being reappointed. That's literally all there was to it.
This wasn't a power struggle. As I said earlier, if there had been any evidence that it was, the Titans' considerations would have been somewhat different, though there's no guarantee the result wouldn't have been the same.
-
There's no factionalism here, no disagreement over politics. The only disagreement is over who should actually have that title—there's nothing larger behind it.
You're trying to make this out to be some kind of conflict between different political factions in the realm, with the lordship as part of the battleground between them, but so far as I can tell, it's absolutely nothing of the sort.
So far as Erik, the character, was concerned, the lordship was rightfully Rhiannon's because Sirion law and/or tradition stated that a Lord who lost their Lordship through capture in battle would have it returned. Eldarion was elected when the automatic referendum finished, and was in the way of Rhiannon being reappointed. That's literally all there was to it.
This wasn't a power struggle. As I said earlier, if there had been any evidence that it was, the Titans' considerations would have been somewhat different, though there's no guarantee the result wouldn't have been the same.
If you changed the word "lordship" for "rulership" in that message, would your opinion remain the same?
So far as Erik, the character, was concerned, the rulership was rightfully Rhiannon's because Sirion law and/or tradition stated that a ruler who lost their rulership through capture in battle would have it returned. Eldarion was elected when the automatic referendum finished, and was in the way of Rhiannon being re-elected. That's literally all there was to it.
That the title be above or below in the feudal hierarchy doesn't change much in my eyes. Fundamentally, person X lost position Y due to capture, the game set off a referendum in which person Z was the winner, and person W disagrees with person X replacing person Z in position Y. Maybe there's no grand political battle behind it all, maybe the realm isn't fiercely split among competing factions, but would the titans really consider this? Would the rule be "you can't oppose someone's election unless your realm has opposing factions claiming said title"? That would seem absurd. There are a number of reasons one could oppose the winner of an election, it wouldn't make sense to start listing contexts where these reasons are legitimate and when they are not.
I've been a magistrate, and yet if I didn't know better than to threaten lords with bans (great way to create a big mess), even I would have thought this line of action to be fine. Placeholding, as the name implies and as the wording of the rule suggests, is merely the act of placing someone (oneself or another) in a position of a certain duration, for the specific intent of replacing that person with another before the duration expires. In this case, those who seek the replacing are not those who did the placing. They didn't seek for there to be a temporary lord, they outright opposed the person being lord at all.
-
If you changed the word "lordship" for "rulership" in that message, would your opinion remain the same?
Are you trying to tell me you think a lordship is the same thing as rulership?
Of course it would be different if the position at stake were the ruler position. It's the highest position in the land, and has broad control over realm policy. A lord doesn't, realistically, have any say in policy decisions. (At least not by virtue of their being a lord.)
That the title be above or below in the feudal hierarchy doesn't change much in my eyes. Fundamentally, person X lost position Y due to capture, the game set off a referendum in which person Z was the winner, and person W disagrees with person X replacing person Z in position Y. Maybe there's no grand political battle behind it all, maybe the realm isn't fiercely split among competing factions, but would the titans really consider this? Would the rule be "you can't oppose someone's election unless your realm has opposing factions claiming said title"? That would seem absurd. There are a number of reasons one could oppose the winner of an election, it wouldn't make sense to start listing contexts where these reasons are legitimate and when they are not.
I've been a magistrate, and yet if I didn't know better than to threaten lords with bans (great way to create a big mess), even I would have thought this line of action to be fine. Placeholding, as the name implies and as the wording of the rule suggests, is merely the act of placing someone (oneself or another) in a position of a certain duration, for the specific intent of replacing that person with another before the duration expires. In this case, those who seek the replacing are not those who did the placing. They didn't seek for there to be a temporary lord, they outright opposed the person being lord at all.
So you really think it's wrong to choose to be a placeholder, but just fine to force someone else to be a placeholder?
If that's the case, then I'm damn glad you're no longer a Magistrate.
There is a fundamental difference between a power struggle, with actual political power at stake, and simply disagreeing over who should be in a particular lordship solely based on what the realm's law says. In this case, Erik didn't even come to Eldarion and say, "I don't want you in this Lordship, so you'd better leave now, and if you don't I'll become Judge and ban you!" No, what he said was much more along the lines of, "If you step down peacefully now, I'd be happy to help you get another Lordship when there's one available, but this one belongs to Rhiannon."
Not every disagreement in BattleMaster is a political power struggle.
-
Firs, about the Sirionite Constitution, I found just a very small part of it at the Wiki. Specially the "BooK: Titles and Domains". That was formulated by Erik and and I cannot remember the character's name now (Anurak, maybe!?), but he received help of one Lord in this. In real life, he's lawyer. He's not playing anymore and believe me, I'm not compelled to seek 2TB of my olds computer to seek it now. As someone said, not everything must be or would be saved at the Wiki... seek for Sirion and you will find Rugina as Prime Minister. That's about lands, the power of the Duke to indicate in times of war, etc. Do we have become lazy with our records? For sure. I will need a bible to save everything Erik said inside the Council while Judge for years. The mentality is pretty obvious: We don't want to punish our Lords, giving their regions aways because they was caught in battle: a double punishment for fight for Sirion. She asked her region back. It's her right. Thinking about oath, she was indicated. She has his preference, his appointment and expected to have right over the lands given to her. Erik did it as a stubborn!? His way.
Also, back in time, I would have been punished before. Erik always said in his early campaigns that he would be the Judge to reform the Council, kicking old silent Dukes. Any way or another, he did. Power struggle. Let's put in in perspective: if Atanamir, by some miracle, decided to return to Sirion... put his name to a position in Avamar and won. Erik could not threaten half the world, or the entire world, to become Judge once again to kick him?
Once again, while I understand and accept the punishments, it's have northing to do with the placeholder thing. For me, and that was my fault, was to believe a Placeholder is someone appointed or elected with the specific "mission" to protect the region while someone else waits to take it... like: "I'm not in love but I gonna !@#$ you 'till someone better comes along". That's definitely not the case.
-
Are you trying to tell me you think a lordship is the same thing as rulership?
Of course it would be different if the position at stake were the ruler position. It's the highest position in the land, and has broad control over realm policy. A lord doesn't, realistically, have any say in policy decisions. (At least not by virtue of their being a lord.)
So you really think it's wrong to choose to be a placeholder, but just fine to force someone else to be a placeholder?
If that's the case, then I'm damn glad you're no longer a Magistrate.
There is a fundamental difference between a power struggle, with actual political power at stake, and simply disagreeing over who should be in a particular lordship solely based on what the realm's law says. In this case, Erik didn't even come to Eldarion and say, "I don't want you in this Lordship, so you'd better leave now, and if you don't I'll become Judge and ban you!" No, what he said was much more along the lines of, "If you step down peacefully now, I'd be happy to help you get another Lordship when there's one available, but this one belongs to Rhiannon."
Not every disagreement in BattleMaster is a political power struggle.
Lords do hold power.
And the duke doesn't have any power to force him to do anything. The most he can do is hike ducal taxes for everyone, which will do him absolutely no good. He can bark all he wants, that's all he is doing. The lord has absolutely no reason to comply with this barking.
Unlike for rulership. When one gets a new ruler, be it by elections or rebellion, he can be ousted quickly if his opposition is large enough. If a new ruler is instantly protested out of office, is he being "forced to be a placeholder"? Is everyone protesting him deserving of a lock?
It's the "forcing another to be a placeholder" argument I don't buy.
-
Lords do hold power.
And the duke doesn't have any power to force him to do anything. The most he can do is hike ducal taxes for everyone, which will do him absolutely no good. He can bark all he wants, that's all he is doing. The lord has absolutely no reason to comply with this barking.
Unlike for rulership. When one gets a new ruler, be it by elections or rebellion, he can be ousted quickly if his opposition is large enough. If a new ruler is instantly protested out of office, is he being "forced to be a placeholder"? Is everyone protesting him deserving of a lock?
So...what you're saying is that rulership is totally worthless, and being the ruler gets you no power, while being Lord gives you absolute power.
Sorry, I don't buy it. Power is about more than what buttons the game gives you and your political opponents.
The amount of power you have is the amount of power the people around you give you. If you're an untitled noble who is liked and respected by the people in the realm, you'll likely have a lot more power than a Lord or Duke everyone hates. If you're a beloved Ruler who was elected by a supermajority, put against a Lord who got his position by buying it from an enemy and who regularly lets his contempt for everyone else in the realm be known, then you probably have more power than he does.
It's the "forcing another to be a placeholder" argument I don't buy.
Well, fortunately, I'm not asking for you to buy it. You just have to accept that that is the official consensus of the Titans, which I fully support. The rule was created primarily to prevent turnover from being reduced; forcing the person who gained the position because of that turnover to give it back is significantly worse than that person simply choosing to do so of his own free will, because it actively deprives someone new of a position in favor of someone old.
-
For me, what makes this situation bad is the idea that someone who wins an election for a lordship isn't the rightful lord. Of course they are, they won the election! Making claims to the contrary is an example of "RP trumps mechanics". That's not acceptable.
There is nothing against game rules by having an IG/IC policy of returning lordships to nobles that lost them due to wounds, imprisonment, etc. It's only a problem when you combine that with automatic lordship elections. You're having official elections, but ignoring the results, sometimes, because you don't like that specific outcome. If you don't want to accept the outcome of elections, then don't hold elections! Switch to an appointed system.
Let's put in in perspective: if Atanamir, by some miracle, decided to return to Sirion... put his name to a position in Avamar and won. Erik could not threaten half the world, or the entire world, to become Judge once again to kick him?
The answer to that is: "It depends." If you say you're going to ban him because he's an enemy of Sirion and shouldn't be in the realm at all, then you're fine. If you threaten to ban him because the noble that used to hold that position is really the rightful lord and he needs to step down from that position so you can reappoint the "rightful lord", and if he does step down it's all good, then you're back in the same situation that landed you here.
You can avoid this entire situation from ever happening again in two completely separate ways:
1) Stop electing lords when most of the time you really just want to reappoint the old one. Switch to appointed lords. When you do want to elect someone, start a referendum and appoint the winner.
2) Keep holding elections, but acknowledge that whoever wins the election is the lord of that region. You'll just have to accept that, on occasion, someone will lose a position that they used to have because they couldn't enter the election.
What you've got now is a bastardized half-and-half system that, most of the time, doesn't do what you want. This is guaranteed to eventually cause you problems.
-
For me, what makes this situation bad is the idea that someone who wins an election for a lordship isn't the rightful lord. Of course they are, they won the election! Making claims to the contrary is an example of "RP trumps mechanics". That's not acceptable.
Fortunately, that did not happen. What happened was this:
He was never appointed there to hold a position. He was elected and ordered to leave. Call it another name if you want, but he's not a placeholder, just a victim of a crazy Duke with power in his old head accomplishing the laws of his old realm.
-
Fortunately, that did not happen.
It's exactly what happened.
Rhiannon lost the lordship. Eldarion was elected. When Rhiannon returned, Eldarion was told that in Sirion, you give back regions to Lords who lose them due to capture. No, Erik didn't use the word "rightful" or a direct synonym, but the implication was clear: that despite being elected to the Lordship, Eldarion had to step down just so that it could be given back to the person who held it before.
-
It's exactly what happened.
Rhiannon lost the lordship. Eldarion was elected. When Rhiannon returned, Eldarion was told that in Sirion, you give back regions to Lords who lose them due to capture. No, Erik didn't use the word "rightful" or a direct synonym, but the implication was clear: that despite being elected to the Lordship, Eldarion had to step down just so that it could be given back to the person who held it before.
What you said is what happened. It is not "RP trumps mechanics".
There is a world of difference between "You're not really the Lord, please step down so that the bureaucracy can reflect correctly who should be the Lord" and "I order you to step down from your position and you will do it because I am stronger than you are".
Not that I'm arguing that the second is OK. It did violate the placeholder position, that's fine, but it's not the same as claiming the game-mechanic election is invalid because of RP. That would be a completely different violation of the rules, and it did not occur.
-
IIRC, the wording was something like "you won the election, but the region belongs to [the previous lord]" This directly contradicts the game mechanics. The region belongs to the character that won the election.
-
IIRC, the wording was something like "you won the election, but the region belongs to [the previous lord]" This directly contradicts the game mechanics. The region belongs to the character that won the election.
Look, I'm not a Titan, I don't know if you are and I'm not supposed to ask. I can tell you that if I remember correctly this was not the wording, and I can check the realm channel and in-council messages because I'm in Sirion's council.
Now, it's possible that there were other private letters that had a different, more problematic wording. If that's the case, I can only reiterate that the Titan rulings and their reasonings should be posted publicly, and ideally prior to enforcement. From my point of view in Sirion, yes there was a violation of the placeholder rule, but there was no "RP trumps mechanics" issue. Eldarion was duly elected and that was recognized.
-
If you can check, then go ahead. Then neither of us will have to wonder.
As for case summaries, they are working on one. I will post it for them when it is complete.
The idea of more public verdicts is something you will have to bring up with Tom and Anaris.
-
If you can check, then go ahead. Then neither of us will have to wonder.
I meant that I did check.
The only message I saw prior to the ruling is:
I requested Eldarion to leave Montijo so I can give the region to the former Countess.
Eldarion is the Count of Montijo, and the Duke wants him to resign. I have seen nothing that would imply that the election is illegitimate or invalid.
-
Ah, sorry, I interpreted your post differently than you meant.
-
And people say there is no power struggle. The only way there is no a power struggle is because It was decided be other means than people telling Erik: "The region is mine, you crazy old Duke, I will not leave. !@#$ you and your orders" or the Judge saying: "Then try to win and put me out of position, you jerk!!!". I never saw any of this before wake up and realize I did something terrible wrong and was blocked.
Erik sent a request, when the Lord ignored, he considered it a power struggle. In his world, a vassal must obey him. When he ignored, Erik sent an order to him and a threat to the Council. I can be blamed by the "placeholder thing", but if you cannot see a power struggle here, I cannot see anything besides that... a power struggle: "You're on my way, leave or I will make you leave.". It's all about power. Wrong? Well, as it seems, yes. But about power.
It's hard to deal with these ambiguities and know how to proceed in relation to tournaments, placeholders, recruitment: "You can do that way, but NEVER that way". When you fall in a gray area, you immediately become a criminal and a yellow message makes you look like an outcast who suddenly does not deserve your position in the realm where he has served since ever.
-
Erik sent a request, when the Lord ignored, he considered it a power struggle. In his world, a vassal must obey him. When he ignored, Erik sent an order to him and a threat to the Council. I can be blamed by the "placeholder thing", but if you cannot see a power struggle here, I cannot see anything besides that... a power struggle: "You're on my way, leave or I will make you leave.". It's all about power. Wrong? Well, as it seems, yes. But about power.
But if there had not been a law or tradition in Sirion of returning Lordship positions to Lords who were captured, would you even have wanted Eldarion out of Montijo?
Did you like Eldarion? Or did you have something against him, personally? Was the reason you wanted Rhiannon in the Lordship just because she held it before? Or was it because she was a political supporter, and Eldarion was a political opponent?
That is what makes it a power struggle, or not.
-
But if there had not been a law or tradition in Sirion of returning Lordship positions to Lords who were captured, would you even have wanted Eldarion out of Montijo?
Did you like Eldarion? Or did you have something against him, personally? Was the reason you wanted Rhiannon in the Lordship just because she held it before? Or was it because she was a political supporter, and Eldarion was a political opponent?
That is what makes it a power struggle, or not.
A rule is bad if it's application revolves around one character's "feelings" towards another.
-
A rule is bad if it's application revolves around one character's "feelings" towards another.
I'm sorry you feel that way.
But you're not the one making the rules. You may not like the rule, but it is not going to change, and you are obliged to follow it.
-
Echtelion is the traditionalist. Erik would do as it please him, as he did. He's a Duke, why he must think he must obey elections for Avamar despite what he wants for his Duchy? That's another power struggle, one with the system itself. That's why he prefer to appoint his nobles.
He never had anything personal against Eldarion until Rhiannon ask her region back. Why a womanizer would ignore the appeal of a Lady in detriment of an unknown man? When he refused the request and forced to Erik to send an order enforcing his position and his desire over his lands, there's the beginning of a power struggle. And yes, she is a political supporter. Everyone is his duchy are, since they are appointed, mainly for Tabost and Linbar, regions that belonged to Sirion and changed alliance to him. To keep these regions, he always select very well who will be appointed. If you care or not, he have a preference for Ladies, another reason to prefer her instead of him. That's to change a political supporter for someone he never received a word about. Another power struggle would be with Celine, since he failed to make Perdan obey the prisoner agreements to release Rhiannon in time to be reappointed.
Erik faced a major confrontation with Zakilevo when he was PM and tried to reform the Duchies. When he said he would do it Erik wanting it or not and that he would talk with his Ladies and Lords, Erik did the same, requesting his Lord to stay at his side and ignore the PM. Everything in Avamar is about power struggle.
While they never hated Eldarion, he was furious when he ignored his request. It must be silly, but Erik would always prefer a good Lady.
-
He's a Duke, why he must think he must obey elections for his duchy despite what he wants for his Duchy?
Because a Lord who is elected is Lord. That is what Indirik was saying.
If Erik doesn't like the elections, he can't take it out on the Lords who get elected. He needs to take it up with the Ruler. He needs to get Lordships changed to appointed.
-
I'm sorry you feel that way.
But you're not the one making the rules. You may not like the rule, but it is not going to change, and you are obliged to follow it.
In which case my sentiments echo De-Legro's: the rule should be re-written to properly reflect this reality. The rule saying nothing about the debatable aspect of "forcing" another to become a place holder.
-
Because a Lord who is elected is Lord.
Not HIS Lord. That why he was asked to leave. He never said the election is illegitimate, just that he prefer his Lady instead of an unknown Lord that he never chose to be there.
-
Because a Lord who is elected is Lord. That is what Indirik was saying.
To elaborate on that, Erik could have said during the election that you did not want Eldarion to run, or any other man for that matter. That would have been an in-realm power struggle, and I don't think it would have broken any rule.
But after the election, you can't simply undo it. That's the problem.
-
He never said it because everyone knows. He was elected by 3 votes as always happens when people knows that the former Lord was arrested.
-
He never said it because everyone knows. He was elected by 3 votes as always happens when people knows that the former Lord was arrested.
It doesn't matter if he was elected solely by his own vote for himself. He was elected, and became the sole rightful Lord of Montijo.
Not HIS Lord. That why he was asked to leave. He never said the election is illegitimate, just that he prefer his Lady instead of an unknown Lord that he never chose to be there.
As long as there are elections for Lordship, Erik doesn't get to choose. It doesn't matter if it's "his" duchy. The elections are valid no matter what Erik thinks or wants.
If you want to be able to choose Lords for your duchy, you have exactly one recourse: get the Ruler to change the government settings so Lords are appointed, not elected.
-
And knowing all of this, he did what he did and that is not a power struggle. Well... I give up :)
-
Apparently not everyone knew out, because someone ran. And was elected. So they are the lord.
This rule has nothing to do with politics or power struggles, or trying to get some cute lady noble into Erik's bed. All that stuff is distraction and irrelevancies.
If you want to run your duchy work an iron fist, then get the realm laws changed to allow that to happen. Otherwise, when someone wins an election in accordance with realm laws, they *are* the rightful, lawful, proper lord/owner. Demanding that they step down so you can appoint the prior lord because everyone knows they are the real lord and the guy that just won the election is a squatter, will just land you back in the same boat.
And yes, that may require you to alter your character's rp a bit. I'm sure you're smart enough to figure out a way to work that in.
-
Yes, I will have to think about it while I'm also worried how to explain that a god from a outer-world descended from the sky to take his title. Maybe Erik will call this god "The Beast with a Billion Backs".
-
Eduardo, your argument is invalid.
In any game, if you break the rule you can not justify it with roleplay. For example, in games where griefing is explicitly forbidden, you can not grief a noob and then just say "But that's what my character would do! I'm just roleplaying!"
You still broke the rules. You'd still get punished.
That's common sense.
-
Really? That was why I was punished, but since the discussion continues, I'm answering questions, not trying to pledge innocence. It's not like he was caught over Perdan fire-breathing poor villagers because of RP. He did, AGAIN, what a person in power would do. That's wrong and I was punished. Period.
"That's all, folks"
-
In which case my sentiments echo De-Legro's: the rule should be re-written to properly reflect this reality. The rule saying nothing about the debatable aspect of "forcing" another to become a place holder.
I agree. I can definitely see how the placeholder rule, as read, could be interpreted as invalid pertaining to this particular case, and therefore unknowingly abused by players in the future. I think it could use further clarification, as I don't fully understand it myself, and I feel I have a pretty decent grasp on the English language.
HOWEVER, threatening to leave the game just because you lost your position puts the authorities who make these decisions in a tough spot. Say, hypothetically, that Anaris (or the "titans", or whoever) were to give in, lift the ban, and return Erik's position(s)- then every person who gets upset about any decision in the future will know that they can get their way by throwing a tantrum and threatening to leave. Either leave, or stay, but don't try to guilt your way out of a situation with threats.
Finally, if you truly believe this game is all about the RP, then losing your position shouldn't matter, should it? In fact, "long-standing Duke loses his Dukeship and is now a pauper" is a WAY more interesting plot point than "long-standing Duke continues to have his Dukeship in perpetuity".
-
There's nothing to do with the position... but I will not discuss the whole point of the yellow message making me look an undesirable person anymore. Happily enough I believe most of the people knows me and wish to continue playing with me even after that... if not, then leave is the only option.
Erik made a threat, I made a statement.
-
In which case my sentiments echo De-Legro's: the rule should be re-written to properly reflect this reality. The rule saying nothing about the debatable aspect of "forcing" another to become a place holder.
I also agree. When I read the rule as literally as possible, it seems clear to me that the player of Eldarion should have been punished. He took the position and then stepped aside so the prior holder of that position could take it back. Of course, I am pretty sure that is not what was intended when this rule was made.
-
All of this discussion is moot anyway. There's only one person whom Eduardo can appeal to, and that's Tom. If Tom decides to intervene or clarify the intent of the rules, then there you have it.
-
I would never bother Tom with something like this. The verdict was given and the penalty is being fulfilled. All that is being discussed here is just that, an argue.
-
From my point of view the problem here is that the realm adjusts ooc game mechanics with weird ooc rules. How it is roleplaying to hold elections for lord and then have a law that elections winner is not a true lord? I don't see any rp logic in this rule. Thus, the rule/law itself is ooc and it was not very right to use it in your rp power struggle.
-
No one ever said he was not the Lord of Montijo. Erik forced him, being Lord or not, to leave so he can appoint someone else.
-
No one ever said he was not the Lord of Montijo. Erik forced him, being Lord or not, to leave so he can appoint someone else.
As I understood, you said him smth like "leave, coz we have the law", not "leave, coz I don't like your face".
-
Letter from Daniel Risk (30 minutes ago)
Message sent to all full members of "Circle of Fate" (31 recipients)
Eduardo, regarding your case,
Just pointing my opinion, as I can't do it in forums.
(If you any of you want to post it in forums, sure. If not, you welcome to reply for me in person)
To be honest, I do not agree with this 'Place Holder' reasoning.
I do not see too much of Power Struggle either in this case either.
However, part of Government rules is:
Try to guide, not order
This is a game, not the military, even if it simulates a martial society. Try to guide people. Work with suggestions and help and leave people their autonomy. A strict hierarchy of orders and blind followers is more efficient, yes. It also causes people to lose the fun and leave the game.
It could be done otherwise, and it could be avoided.
But the fact Erik actions were more of an order and threaten, then...
The guy won a valid election, and in some ways you can say his autonomy was defiled.
(no idea which lords voted for him though, nor why the previous lord was not released sooner)
So, I think they could even enforce that rule in that case.
I do hope to see you come and play in full speed and don't let it affect you much.
Oh, and Piro...
(I guess you would be reading it too)
As I understood, you said him smth like "leave, coz we have the law", not "leave, coz I don't like your face".
Erik consider himself as ruler of Avamar, so from my point of view it's more like...
Let say it reminded me the scene from Judge Dredd movie (starring Sylvester Stallone), when he says - "I am the Law".
(so something like - 'I'm am the Law ! ; Resign from lordship, that is Rhiannon region, this is your final warning !!!')
I'm back to my business, have great day everyone !
***********
That is NOT rant about the titans. So, don't make it one.
Also, I do NOT try to start public conversation about the issue, just a way to see if someone can post in forums my opinion.
Daniel Risk
-
*yawns*
Nothing changed, aye.
-
What is suppose to change?