Author Topic: Titan decision enforcement: what's acceptable?  (Read 5067 times)

Chenier

  • Honourable King
  • *****
  • Posts: 7815
    • View Profile
Titan decision enforcement: what's acceptable?
« Topic Start: November 19, 2014, 06:06:53 PM »
To give context, recently, the titans stripped Ravenice Plavereen, King of Caelum (BT) of his titles of Duke of the Desert Stronghold, and lord of Watto, which it appears he is not to reclaim for 30 days. The reason for which was because he kept switching titles around and using temporary lordships.

This verdict brings a few questions.

The first of which is: is leaving the positions vacant for 30 days, to then reclaim them for himself, in line with the spirit of the judgement? If he does this, which he explicitly stated he would, he basically loses nothing. He's still the ruler, so he has full power over who gets to be dukes, so in 30 days he'll be duke of the largest duchy and lord of the richest region once again.

The second of which: would giving his second character, currently margrave of the capital, either of these titles be in line with the judgement? Titans regulate player behavior, yet the punishment are often targeted against characters more than players. If the player can simply transfer the lost titles to his second character, then he wouldn't have lost anything at all. Indeed, it's be pretty akin to the title shuffling he got punished for to begin with.

Indirik

  • Exalted Emperor
  • ******
  • Posts: 10849
  • No pressure, no diamonds.
    • View Profile
Re: Titan decision enforcement: what's acceptable?
« Reply #1: November 19, 2014, 07:02:20 PM »
If at first you don't succeed, don't take up skydiving.

trying

  • Noble Lord
  • ***
  • Posts: 184
    • View Profile
Re: Titan decision enforcement: what's acceptable?
« Reply #2: November 19, 2014, 07:57:14 PM »
What? Switching lordships frequently is against the rules?

Anaris

  • BM Dev Team
  • Honourable King
  • *
  • Posts: 7723
    • View Profile
Re: Titan decision enforcement: what's acceptable?
« Reply #3: November 19, 2014, 08:23:21 PM »
Timothy Collett

"The only thing you can't trade for your heart's desire...is your heart." "You are what you do.  Choose again, and change." "One of these days, someone's gonna plug you, and you're going to die saying, 'What did I say? What did I say?'"  ~ Miles Naismith Vorkosigan

trying

  • Noble Lord
  • ***
  • Posts: 184
    • View Profile
Re: Titan decision enforcement: what's acceptable?
« Reply #4: November 20, 2014, 05:15:09 AM »
I wasn't concerned about the placeholder issue. I was thinking about what I'm doing in Riombara where I switch lordship everyday. It might be considered "switching titles around and using temporary lordships" but NOT placeholding.

De-Legro

  • BM Dev Team
  • Honourable King
  • *
  • Posts: 3753
    • View Profile
Re: Titan decision enforcement: what's acceptable?
« Reply #5: November 20, 2014, 11:16:52 AM »
I wasn't concerned about the placeholder issue. I was thinking about what I'm doing in Riombara where I switch lordship everyday. It might be considered "switching titles around and using temporary lordships" but NOT placeholding.

Why are you doing that? It is not placeholding in the sense described in the rules, but without some context it still appear to fly in the face of what a Lordship should mean to a character.
Previously of the De-Legro Family
Now of representation unknown.

vonGenf

  • Honourable King
  • *****
  • Posts: 2331
    • View Profile
Re: Titan decision enforcement: what's acceptable?
« Reply #6: November 20, 2014, 03:13:13 PM »
Why are you doing that? It is not placeholding in the sense described in the rules, but without some context it still appear to fly in the face of what a Lordship should mean to a character.

A full third of Riombaran regions are Lordless by lack of nobles. The banker runs in elections here and there to make sure the food stores are managed. They are game-mechanics triggered elections.
After all it's a roleplaying game.

Indirik

  • Exalted Emperor
  • ******
  • Posts: 10849
  • No pressure, no diamonds.
    • View Profile
Re: Titan decision enforcement: what's acceptable?
« Reply #7: November 20, 2014, 04:25:29 PM »
Completely unnecessary. Bankers have direct access to the granaries of empty regions. I do it every day.

Continuous swapping by elections is just as bad as doing it by appointment. If you have regions without lords, then that's just too bad.
If at first you don't succeed, don't take up skydiving.

trying

  • Noble Lord
  • ***
  • Posts: 184
    • View Profile
Re: Titan decision enforcement: what's acceptable?
« Reply #8: November 20, 2014, 06:23:33 PM »
It is unnecessary if you have a good banker. I just get a nice profit from selling hundreds of bushels of food. It's arguably the only way I can make being a trader viable.
« Last Edit: November 20, 2014, 06:26:53 PM by trying »

Indirik

  • Exalted Emperor
  • ******
  • Posts: 10849
  • No pressure, no diamonds.
    • View Profile
Re: Titan decision enforcement: what's acceptable?
« Reply #9: November 20, 2014, 07:17:02 PM »
Being able to make a profit does not make abusing the lordship system acceptable. Lordships are supposed to be serious things. If you have so many more regions than nobles, maybe you shouldn't have so many regions.
If at first you don't succeed, don't take up skydiving.

vonGenf

  • Honourable King
  • *****
  • Posts: 2331
    • View Profile
Re: Titan decision enforcement: what's acceptable?
« Reply #10: November 20, 2014, 07:28:08 PM »
If you have so many more regions than nobles, maybe you shouldn't have so many regions.

It's not like anyone keeps the regions lordless on purpose for the enjoyment of this character. I'd welcome anyone to come over and rule these regions permanently. OOCly, I'd also welcome anyone coming to try and wrestle them away from us.

There is no victim here. There is no set-up to abet any abuse. There are just a lot of regions with monthly elections and a character who sees more profit to be made by ruling over a different region than his own. This happens all the time when there is an election; we just happen to have very many right now.
After all it's a roleplaying game.

De-Legro

  • BM Dev Team
  • Honourable King
  • *
  • Posts: 3753
    • View Profile
Re: Titan decision enforcement: what's acceptable?
« Reply #11: November 20, 2014, 10:08:07 PM »
It's not like anyone keeps the regions lordless on purpose for the enjoyment of this character. I'd welcome anyone to come over and rule these regions permanently. OOCly, I'd also welcome anyone coming to try and wrestle them away from us.

There is no victim here. There is no set-up to abet any abuse. There are just a lot of regions with monthly elections and a character who sees more profit to be made by ruling over a different region than his own. This happens all the time when there is an election; we just happen to have very many right now.

The victim is the world setting. Jumping regions constantly in no way ties into the mindset nobility should have. Remember what Delvin said about the oath to the people that you abandon when stepping down as a Lord? If you have more regions then characters to manage them then just let them go rogue, drop the least attractive regions. This should happen naturally anyway, since people should be slowly gaining a lordship in the better regions, depleting the pool of available nobles to run for the lesser regions.
Previously of the De-Legro Family
Now of representation unknown.

vonGenf

  • Honourable King
  • *****
  • Posts: 2331
    • View Profile
Re: Titan decision enforcement: what's acceptable?
« Reply #12: November 20, 2014, 10:23:49 PM »
This should happen naturally anyway, since people should be slowly gaining a lordship in the better regions, depleting the pool of available nobles to run for the lesser regions.

So, when a character sees an election starting, and thinks "hey, it would be better for me if I could run this region", at which point exactly should he not run because it hurts the world setting? Is the counter reset every time a region goes rogue?

Basically, you're saying a character should not have the right to run in an election if he won a previous election a short time prior. Which, on the face of it, would be a justifiable rule of the game, if it were a rule of the game. However it's not one, and it's not right to tell people they're abusing the system when they simply click the buttons that the games gives them.


Remember what Delvin said about the oath to the people that you abandon when stepping down as a Lord?

To address that point, there is an honour drop to leave the Lordship of a region, so that is taken into account game-mechanically, and it is also taken into account in RP in that a character who has had Lordship to multiple regions cannot claim a long history of leading one particular region.
After all it's a roleplaying game.

Indirik

  • Exalted Emperor
  • ******
  • Posts: 10849
  • No pressure, no diamonds.
    • View Profile
Re: Titan decision enforcement: what's acceptable?
« Reply #13: November 21, 2014, 01:40:00 AM »
So, when a character sees an election starting, and thinks "hey, it would be better for me if I could run this region", at which point exactly should he not run because it hurts the world setting?
We're not talking about someone who gets elected as lord of a badlands, and the next day enters his name in the election that just started for lordship of a city. What we're talking about is: "I switch lordship everyday."

If you don't intend to actually *be* the lord of the region, then you shouldn't run in the election. If you're intention is to get to the Command tab and sell the food, then be elected lord of another region in the next day or two, then chances are you're doing something wrong.

The situation being described here is one where someone is entering into an election for a lordship knowing that he will only have it for a day or two, and fully intending to leave it for another. And then continually doing it in a big circle of unwanted/unlorded regions. I don't see any situation where this is appropriate, or any possible argument that could be made to justify it. It may not specifically be called out in a placeholder rule, but that's because these rules were written when the game was in such a state that the situation being described is simply unimaginable.

It is also completely unnecessary in order to accomplish the stated objective of managing food.

Quote
However it's not one, and it's not right to tell people they're abusing the system when they simply click the buttons that the games gives them.
"The game let me click the button" is never an excuse for abusing game mechanics. The game lets you do quite a few things which, if done for certain reasons, could be completely against the rules. That's why we have rules. Because game mechanics cannot cover every situation.

Quote
To address that point, there is an honour drop to leave the Lordship of a region, so that is taken into account game-mechanically
Honor loss does not apply when you lose the region due to being elected to a new region. It should. That would stop such blatant abuses.
If at first you don't succeed, don't take up skydiving.

De-Legro

  • BM Dev Team
  • Honourable King
  • *
  • Posts: 3753
    • View Profile
Re: Titan decision enforcement: what's acceptable?
« Reply #14: November 21, 2014, 05:19:32 AM »
So, when a character sees an election starting, and thinks "hey, it would be better for me if I could run this region", at which point exactly should he not run because it hurts the world setting? Is the counter reset every time a region goes rogue?

Basically, you're saying a character should not have the right to run in an election if he won a previous election a short time prior. Which, on the face of it, would be a justifiable rule of the game, if it were a rule of the game. However it's not one, and it's not right to tell people they're abusing the system when they simply click the buttons that the games gives them.


To address that point, there is an honour drop to leave the Lordship of a region, so that is taken into account game-mechanically, and it is also taken into account in RP in that a character who has had Lordship to multiple regions cannot claim a long history of leading one particular region.

You are attempting to extrapolate to a general sense a comment and judgement made regarding a specific case.

I wasn't concerned about the placeholder issue. I was thinking about what I'm doing in Riombara where I switch lordship everyday. It might be considered "switching titles around and using temporary lordships" but NOT placeholding.

This is not a Lord using the existing election system to advance their "position" by taking up a more prestigious Lordship. It is a specific case of someone taking advantage of the churn of elections due to low noble population with the simple intent of accessing the command tab. Then again SOMEONE is voting him into the new positions, or Riombara has become so apathetic that his own votes are all he requires.

There is a massive difference to my statement about someone jumping CONSTANTLY between regions, and someone that recently came into a Lordship ceasing an opportunity to advance. I can't see how a single occurrence of region swapping could be construed as constantly. Besides as Indirik has mentioned, a major difference is at the time they ran in the election, the character (and players) intent was to be the Lord properly. Future events changed that, but they never entered into the election thinking, in a day or so I will be able to move, again.
Previously of the De-Legro Family
Now of representation unknown.