[Discuss] abusing the strip titles option?

[Robert Croson, Jr]

On 2 Nov 2007 at 15:41, Tessa wrote:

> But going on your logic, it would be rather hard to lead a crusade 
> against the ruler for abusing his power if the game says he isn't.

That's the difference between OOC and IC.

OOC, there is no abuse of the game going on. The *player* used 
a game mechanic to do exactly what that game mechanic was 
intended for: To remove a character from a position of power.

IC, the *characters* can play this is a gross abuse of a ruler's 
power.

You and I here on the mailing list can say: "OK, you caught me! I 
was trying to start a war, and you stopped me from doing it. 
Hmm.... Now my character is mad, and wants to get even, so how 
can I do it? I know, I can accuse you of being a power-mad 
ryrant!"

> Of course, I always thought stripping someone of their nobility to get 
> them out of a lordship *was* abuse. Because you're not saying you think 
> the noble is a peasant, you're saying you don't want him in power, 
> that's not the same thing. And judging from the game generated message:
> 
> This is not a minor thing! The very foundations of nobility are being 
> shaken! This is not about being bad, evil or even destructive to the 
> realm, this is about the very birthright you, too, enjoy. If nobles can 
> not be sure they are recognized as nobles anymore, then you could be 
> next. Protest loudly, unless you agree that the banned one was indeed a 
> slimy peasant and not possibly a noble, not even an evil one.
> 
> It is indeed supposed to be only for when the noble is question is 
> having his nobility questioned.

And why would you do it? The *only* effect it has on the target is 
to remove them from their titled positions.

As I explained in my other message, I believe the confusion 
comes from both sides of the action being told different, and 
mutually incompatible things.