My table for gaining RP.

[Robert Harper]

At 04:33 PM 1/9/97 -0600, you wrote:
>
>It seems that we have had these extended discussions of the "unfair"
>advantages that trade routes give theives, and then you allow more than
>theives to control these routes. I like your idea. If trade routes
>increased power, then everybody would be interested in having one, so why
>not? Nice job.
>
Whew, list has certainly picked up in the last couple of weeks.

To recap, in my campaign with higher development levels generally, I reduced
RP earned from trade routes by half. As another noted, it puts Thief
regents up to their maximum earning on RP quickly otherwise.

Didn't reduce GB earnings as I felt that "in game" actions could do that
(i.e. the Ruler of the province you're trading with says he would like a few
GB off the top as a tariff or else he will supress the entire route with a
Decree as the Trade Route action notes he can).

I agree that in campaign fixes might address the problem overall, but I
prefer not to continually be throwing stuff at a thief to slow him down to
everybody else's rate - although there's a whole lot that can go wrong with
a trade route, and the thief maintaining a large army using the revenue
could suddenly find the troops unpaid if the route is cut.

__________________________________________________ _________________
| |
| We ask ourselves if there is a God, how can this happen? |
| Better to ask, if there is a God, must it be sane? |
| |
| Lucien LaCroix |
|_________________________________________________ __________________|

[Jaanus Lillenberg]

Hey

> I agree that in campaign fixes might address the problem overall, but I
> prefer not to continually be throwing stuff at a thief to slow him down to
> everybody else's rate - although there's a whole lot that can go wrong with
> a trade route, and the thief maintaining a large army using the revenue
> could suddenly find the troops unpaid if the route is cut.

For comment:

I think thief regents should be able to hire only mercenary units.
Of course if they have got the local regent under their thumb the
things would be different.

Jaanus
- ---

[Jonathan Picklesimer]

On Thu, 9 Jan 1997, Robert Harper wrote:
>
> I agree that in campaign fixes might address the problem overall, but I
> prefer not to continually be throwing stuff at a thief to slow him down to
> everybody else's rate - although there's a whole lot that can go wrong with
> a trade route, and the thief maintaining a large army using the revenue
> could suddenly find the troops unpaid if the route is cut.
>

I don't feel that you have to go out of your way to make things rough on
theives. I know that international business is not for the faint of
heart. It takes a lot of money, time, and influence to keep a successful
endeavor going. Doing things that, while not down right unfair, hat
simulate the difficulty of maintaining the business relationships will
keep the guilds busy enough to make money, and simultaneously busy enough
to be watching their own store more than others. :)

Jonathan

[Ian Hoskins]

On 11-Jan-97, Jaanus Lillenberg wrote:

- ->For comment:

- ->I think thief regents should be able to hire only mercenary units.
- ->Of course if they have got the local regent under their thumb the
- ->things would be different.

I allowed my thief regent to hire mercenarys. As long as he had the permission
of the regent who controlled the province he was hiring them from. He paided a
vast some of money to a NPC regent who needed the cash at the time and hired
several units of mercenaries who he shipped into his fortified holding without
the ruler of the kingdom finding out (required an adventure on his part).

- --
Darkstar

hoss@satech.net.au
http://www.satech.net.au/~hoss/index.html

`Now weary traveller rest your head
because just like me you're totally dead.'

A.J. Rimmer Bsc Ssc