[Discuss] Estates Problems

[Chuong Huynh]

On 5/4/07, Dorian Gray <portrait.of.dorian.gray at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 5/4/07, James <TheKobald at tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
> >
> > Timothy Collett wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > You miss the point.
> > >
> > > The problem most (I think) have been complaining of in this thread is
> > that there is no incentive for the *defenders* to accept or offer a peace
> > treaty: they know that if they surrender, they'll only be a shadow of their
> > former selves, and think it more worthwhile to force the attackers to
> > destroy them, thus damaging their reputation and making the claims last a
> > long time.
> > >
> > > It is, of course, quite ridiculous, and almost no one of the time
> > would have acted that way (unless they were mad).  But since there is really
> > no significant negative consequence to the players (or even the characters!)
> > for having their realm destroyed, it becomes a pretty viable option.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > There is now that lords and knights will lose honour when their region
> > is taken over etc.
>
>
> Have all the characters that held a title in the last, say, 14 days of the
> realm's existence die. Kind of realistic, captured nobles with no place to
> go might well get hanged. That'll provide some incentive.
>

Well if they just get turned rogue after the a few days then everyone has a
chance to die. Don't people lose honour and prestige for changing realms?
There isnt much of an option to not change realms when your realm dies so
the honour and prestige loss is already there.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://news.battlemaster.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20070504/6b32f687/attachment.htm