[Discuss] Oaths of fealty and their confliction with

[Josiah Allen]

On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 12:39 PM, Boštjan Pajntar <bostjan.pajntar at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Josiah Allen pravi:
> > How I see it...
> >
> > A marshal is your superior, but if you disobey him you should be
> > reported to your liege first, not the judge.  The liege can then
> > decide if he wants to request official punishment.
> I guess there is no way we can agree. I admit a realm could decide on
> such a system as far as I know most dont. Luckly game mechanics do not
> inforce this. The world can be much more diverse this way. After all why
> would the judge want to release a big part of his powers to Lords.
>
> For sure this was not so in the real life. For desertion in times of war
> capital punishment is usual. Granted Lords did or did not send knights
> to war. They even recalled them. But for a knight without being formally
> recalled to abandon the army...


 We are nobles, not soldiers.  You can dissolve your oath of fealty and
leave the army, find a lord who agrees with you, and certainly your life is
not in danger, though a corrupt judge could punish you I suppose.  You still
have the noble right to serve who you wish.  All power is derived from the
masses, and what they are willing to put up with.  If you elect a judge who
is lenient about military orders, then things will be lenient.



>
>
>
> Friedrich Nietzsche lost his marbles in the end.
>

Syphilis is a harsh disease.

-- 
"Growth in wisdom may be exactly measured by decrease in bitterness"
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://news.battlemaster.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20080312/d69277e5/attachment.htm