Friendly rebellion - A case for the Titans?

[Shenron]

Then it wasn't really a rebellion at all, was it? That's my problem with it. If they rebelled to make use of mechanics, its a cop out. Its hard to see how they think they can survive when they know precisely why they're doomed and do nothing about it? In line with the families involved though. Keeps things interesting 

Finn.

Yah I agree. Don't we have some sort of guideline that the game mechanic sets the rules? Ok. The mechanic is called a "rebellion:" it must be used as a rebellion.

But really this should be put in front of the magistrates and the people involved need to defend themselves.

[vonGenf]

Is it in the plans to allow some way to change the government system without a rebellion?

I remember once there was a theocracy where the Ruler was not religious. He wanted nothing to do with theocracy - but there was no IC way he could do it, so the realm remained a "theocracy of nothing".

That is much more against the spirit of the game than a friendly rebellion.

[Shizzle]

Is it in the plans to allow some way to change the government system without a rebellion?

I remember once there was a theocracy where the Ruler was not religious. He wanted nothing to do with theocracy - but there was no IC way he could do it, so the realm remained a "theocracy of nothing".

That is much more against the spirit of the game than a friendly rebellion.

In that case it's up to the realm to find a more pious ruler! I'm sure the player knew what he was starting when he became leader of a theocratic realm?

[Indirik]

It should not be possible to have a "friendly" rebellion. A rebellion is, by it's very definition, an armed resistance to the current government. An attempt to undermine and overthrow the lawful authority of the realm by force of arms, and replace it with your own.

Any kind of agreement like "Let's make sure no one is in the capital except for the five 'rebels', then we'll call the rebellion, I'll immediately give in, and then you can unban me." is, IMO, a blatant abuse of game mechanics.

[Indirik]

Was the government system changed after the rebellion?

If the ruler gives in an steps down, then it is not possible to change the government style. This often bites people attempting to abuse the rebellion mechanics.

[Indirik]

...this was an attempt to change the ...  name of the realm.

Also not possible. (As I believe Bedwyr knows.) It is currently not possible to change the name of an existing realm in any other way than to send an email to Tom and politely ask him to change it for you. He probably won't. But you can try.

[Chenier]

For me it's simply abuse of the game mechanics. A lot worse than strategic secessions. Especially because the "rebellion" allowed the same people to stay in power. Though I guess if the whole realm supported this...

If the ruler gives in an steps down, then it is not possible to change the government style. This often bites people attempting to abuse the rebellion mechanics.

Indeed. The rebellion has to at least succeed by force of arms and not by abdication for the government system to be changed. Kind of a pain when true rebels know they would win and then the ruler abdicates just to spite them.

[vonGenf]

In that case it's up to the realm to find a more pious ruler! I'm sure the player knew what he was starting when he became leader of a theocratic realm?

Ok, for the pious members of the realm, but what about the ruler? What is his "correct" attitude?

Should people not strive to become leader of realms because they do not suit their style? On the contrary, this should increase their desire to rule and make things go their way!

[Shizzle]

Fair point.

However, if the rule is that only rebellions can change government style, we should abide by that. The issue could be discussed, but staging a fake rebellion to circumvent mechanics is cheating.

So perhaps we should be discussing why rebellions are required to do so, instead?

[Hyral]

I will note that according the OOC's from the (new) Ruler, this was an attempt to change the government system and name of the realm.  What I didn't know was that they were letting Optimus back in immediately (i.e. I wasn't sure if Optimus had just been backstabbed or not).

That...Sounds very fishy.

Originally I thought that this was supposed to be more of a "staged" rebellion than a friendly one (for realm saving reasons discussed up-thread), but...if they've actually said that their intention was to use the mechanic to switch government styles then it sort of leaves a bad taste. Whether or not that was their sole intention, or just something incidental they decided to try, I'd be interested in hearing the whole story from them.

[Kain]

But what are you supposed to do if the realm wants to change government style and has majority support for it?

Rebellion is currently the only way so to call that abuse is a little far fetched in my opinion when there are no other options.
Like not being able to pay at the subway because their machines are broke and then getting a fine for not paying.

[Shizzle]

But what are you supposed to do if the realm wants to change government style and has majority support for it?

Rebellion is currently the only way so to call that abuse is a little far fetched in my opinion when there are no other options.
Like not being able to pay at the subway because their machines are broke and then getting a fine for not paying.

But did the realm want to change the system? Or only the top few?

[Bedwyr]

But did the realm want to change the system? Or only the top few?

Supposedly, the whole realm was behind it.  I only have an OOC from the new Ruler as evidence for that, though.

It's entirely possible that this will become fairly moot soon.  The response on the island has been fairly disgusted, especially since they appointed a Zurralius to the Council.  Way, way too many Soliferum connections for everyone's peace of mind.

[Indirik]

But what are you supposed to do if the realm wants to change government style and has majority support for it?

Well, here's a suggestion: Let the realm descend into anarchy by failing to elect a ruler. That should be proof right there that no one in the realm wants the current government to continue. Then when anarchy sets in, have someone claim rulership and reform the government.

Rebellion is currently the only way...

This is incorrect.

[vonGenf]

But did the realm want to change the system? Or only the top few?

Well, that's part of the problem. If the bottom few want to change things, they can rebel. But if the top few want to change things, they can rebel.... against themselves? This doesn't make much sense if you think of it as rebellion against the ruler.

But still, they are rebelling of a sort, not against the ruler but against the guardians of tradition of the realm (churches, judges, minor nobility, etc).

I think it makes RP sense that a ruler would use the troops at his command to rally the army and overthrow the established order. The current mechanics also works that way. The Ruler is autobanned, but by the lawyers of the realm; as soon as those are kicked out, the ban is lifted.