[Discuss] More protection for rogues

[chinook]

The Merc idea might be possible to make happen through the guild feature,
which would almost make a guild like a mini realm with the different members
from different realms banding together under a contract and fighting for
gold in a 3rd party war.  However, this leads me back to the guild treasury
issue I posted earlier which would need to become more flexible to allow
this to actually happen.  A negative issue I see would be the conflict with
leaders of realms and their nobles being involved in a merc guild and
involved in a merc war over the realm's needs.

-----Original Message-----
From: Alexander Keül [mailto:zakath at online.no] 
Sent: Monday, December 24, 2007 4:19 PM
To: 'BattleMaster general discussion list'
Subject: Re: [Discuss] More protection for rogues

> Tom has repeatedly stated that he does not want people to play the
> game as a rogue. You're not *supposed* to be able to successfully
> play a rogue noble.
> 
> Personally, I agree with him.

I agree as well, however what I would have liked to see is the ability to be
a true mercenary. They were an important part of medieval warfare, and quite
frequently one would find younger sons of the nobility leading those
companies while seeking honour and land of their own.

Not owing your allegiance to a lord shouldn't be quite impossible, but if
some system were introduced for mercenaries you would have freedom, but also
quite a problem when all the wars dry up. Not to mention that you might tend
to be quite unpopular if your troops did as mercenaries often did, went on a
looting frenzy often leaving behind what was bolted to the floor and
wouldn't burn.

Alex



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


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