[Discuss] duchy rework 2

[Robert Croson, Jr]

On 25 Mar 2008 at 14:01, Timothy Collett wrote:

> Robert Croson, Jr wrote:
> > I'm not so sure that anyone would have to be *under* another person
> > to have an estate in that region. The ruler could have a country
> > home outside the capital, but that doesn't mean he's a knight of the
> > Baron. He just owns land there. And since he's the ruler, he can do
> > that kind of thing.
> 
> I'm not sure that makes much sense.
> 
> First of all, I was looking at "belonging to a region" in terms of
> either being its Lord or its Knight.  If you aren't one of these, I
> don't know that you can really say that you "belong" to a region.

If you own property in a region, then you have a vested interest in its 
wellbeing. 

> Secondly, while this may be from a later period than we're aiming for,
> I would think that the Ruler would "own" land in most or all
> regions--they are called "Crown Lands".

This is pretty much what I was going for in my section above. If you own land 
in the region, you are tied to that region in some sense or other, even if you do 
not owe fealty to the lord of the region. This would only be appropriate for the 
people at the top of the chain (ruler/general/judge/banker) who do not have a 
region lordship of their own. All other nobles should have an oath of fealty to 
*someone*.


-- 
Rob

When you find yourself in the company of a halfling and an ill-tempered
Dragon, remember, you do not have to outrun the Dragon...
...you just have to outrun the halfling.




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