[Discuss] Change to positions

[Timothy Collett]

On Aug 18, 2006, at 1:55 PM, LilWolf wrote:
> I don't really like the idea that getting a new ruler would lead to  
> actual battles within the realm. That puts the amount of  
> destruction caused by it too high in my opinion. It's already  
> pretty bad that you're in a situation where people are actively  
> wanting to change the ruler. Why discourage it by creating a  
> penalty (internal realm fights would be a pretty hefty penalty in  
> times of war. Maybe even worse than a "missing" ruler)?

I don't know; it seems to much more closely model the way it would  
have happened...changes not in King, but in dynasty, were rare, and  
usually accompanied by bloodshed.

Now, I would say that the people should be given the chance to  
support their chosen candidate (or the current King), and if one side  
has overwhelming support, it should, in some way, reduce or eliminate  
the chance of a battle (maybe the rebellious factions should just  
skirmish or something)--in any case, there should be the possibility  
of a bloodless coup, if it's got broad support.

Timothy Collett
Anaris Family

--

"To confine our attention to terrestrial matters would be to limit  
the human spirit."
  -- Stephen Hawking



-- 
Unsubscribing and other list options:
http://news.battlemaster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss