Not at all, it existed. The corruption of elections to enforce tyranny.
No, it did not. I saw nearly all the messages going around in Barca at this time (which really wasn't that many, relatively speaking; they aren't the chattiest realm). Tyranny was not on anybody's mind. What was on their mind was that they had a realm-within-a-realm that clearly had no interest in the realm's established goals and policies.
The corrupt dukes were hoarding land, colluding together to control the power and wealth of Barca to distribute it as they pleased and were forcing lords to comply and break their oaths under threat of punishment if they don't whilst being overly taxed as an attempt to force them.
Oh gracious. Dukes were hoarding land. You don't say? They were distributing land as they pleased? Dukes were? Really? How corrupt! Imagine that, dukes distributing land as they pleased, and punishing lords when they break their oaths! How ghastly! And imagine dukes using taxes as a way to punish unruly or disruptive lords– that's unthinkable!
Actually, this is
exactly how it's supposed to be done. And lords getting angry about it is exactly the response you'd expect, I grant. It's a powerplay
by both sides. Sure they will ICly couch it in terms of rights and honor and corruption– but OOCly it's obviously just a run-of-the-mill power play where the lords got bitter that the dukes were more powerful and so, to keep their power and influence, they joined the realm to which they already paid implicit fealty.
I don't recall any expressions of loyalty to Aurvandil until after the threat to secede, and the threat to secede came when the threat of banishment was levied.
No, the Orvandeaux loyalism long predates the ban. Those nobles also favored not enforcing the Treaty of Evanburg as I recall (or, rather, simply complained a lot when it was going to be enforced). Threat to secede also preceded the banishment– though obviously the actual secession came after the banishment. It wouldn't make sense to get banished then THREATEN to secede. The whole in your story here is you've failed to explain why Barca acted the way it did– other than a presumption that they're just terrible, terrible people who like banning good people. But that just doesn't make sense.
That may be the norm for most realms, but not Aurvandil, we aspire to more than letting an old guard hoard the power. I purposefully replace my old guard with new nobles when presented with the opportunity, and when suitable on an in character level. As Aurvandil makes an effort to ensure our old guard doesn't simply hold all the power, we take exception to those who do, it's bad governance in our eyes.
Which is why your ruler and general are the same as when you were founded, and your main duke, city lord, and ruler are one person who never has to face elections.
Tell me again about your egalitarian society.
But in all seriousness– I agree that encouraging new players to get involved is important and good. Terran does lots of that as well (we routinely give brand new members lordships).
But to argue that a realm is corrupt and needs to be destroyed because its existing lords worked together to keep power (yet still gave multiple lordships to new players?) seems a bit silly. By that standard, every realm should be destroyed.
Then again, Aurvandil is at war with nearly every realm...
I'm not sure what you're on about there.
I was pointing out an inconsistency in the position you have articulated.
