BattleMaster > Magistrates Case Archive

Terran-D\'Hara Realm Merger

<< < (4/24) > >>

vonGenf:
There's a lot going on behind the scene, so while it's OK to show some letters I sent, don't assume that's all of them. Pierre is currently juggling different options and is not doing a very good job of it. You see the parts that fell to the ground.

To my defense, I'll say this:

-There are no plans to reform Terran from my part, at all. If there are people who have such plans, it's their business, and they'll have to work for it. I imagine it's not impossible, but it won't be part of an agreed realm merger followed by a secession.

-The letter shared is genuine concerning plans to split D'Hara, but that doesn't mean it's going to happen.

-There is no OOC concertation to achieve any realms merger. The only thing that actually happened is that two region Lords have switched allegiance for their own IC reason. Technically speaking, there is nothing I could have done about it. I could have said "no", but that may not have stopped them from doing what they did. I think there entirely within their rights.

-The anti-merger rule is meant to preclude peaceful merger. There is nothing peaceful about the current situation. Lords of Terran are being thoroughly beaten, and they try to find a way to keep their lands. I think that's entirely legit.

Finally, I would add that the rule (as I understand it) is meant to prohibit peaceful mergers because it leads to large consolidation of lands and extended periods of peace. It is very much not the case here. The situation is likely to lead to more war.

I don't think anyone could argue that Terran is in the situation it is through interaction outside of a war. War is very much the cause of their actions. Acting in a way to force involvement of a third party is a classic move, and there is no rule that says that if Terrans abandon their lands, they are obligated to abandon them to a realm they are at war with.

Frostwood:

--- Quote ----The anti-merger rule is meant to preclude peaceful merger. There is nothing peaceful about the current situation. Lords of Terran are being thoroughly beaten, and they try to find a way to keep their lands. I think that's entirely legit.
--- End quote ---

It would be different if d'hara was at war with Terran.  As far as I know D'Hara has taken no sides in this.  If D'Hara was beating them then it would be legit, but they are not, Phantaria and Farronite are the ones beating them.

Indirik:
I don't see surrendering to a third party to be against the rules. Terran was beaten. The writing was on the wall. The remaining nobles are leaving. Their more powerful neighbors were attacking them. Swapping allegiance to a "neutral" third party is a classic desperation move.

Anaris:

--- Quote from: vonGenf on July 06, 2013, 02:24:37 PM ----The anti-merger rule is meant to preclude peaceful merger. There is nothing peaceful about the current situation. Lords of Terran are being thoroughly beaten, and they try to find a way to keep their lands. I think that's entirely legit.

--- End quote ---

This is absolutely a peaceful/friendly realm merger. If Terran were surrendering to the realms that are defeating it in battle, this would be acceptable. It is not. Terran is merging with a realm with which it has peaceful relations. This is not a surrender. Desperation move, yes, but only so as to deny its regions to realms it dislikes more than D'Hara. That is definitely not the intent of the rule.

Velax:
What is the intent of the rule? What anti-fun behaviour is it intended to prevent?

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page