Investiture as Realm Action

[Morten Helles]

Jan P. M. Arnoldus wrote:

Regarding investiture as a realm action, I would have to agree with
James: Follow the spirit of the game, and forget about the (rather
silly/complex) rules. A regent should (by the help of a priest) be able
to grant his realm/domain to ANYONE, including his son, lieutenant, etc.
And, IMHO, the investiture should pass the regent's bloodline strength,
provinces and holdings but not his/hers RP to the new ruler (the old
regent's RP fizzle into nothingness as part of the investiture).

Hey, think about Rogr Aglondier when he was Rogr Tilgentor, an UNBLOODED
magician with NO holdings. He woke up one morning to find himself
suddenly invested with the power of the previous regent. Rogr didn't
even know he was invested! How do the rules explain that? They cannot,
and remember: The rules are guidelines; if they seem unrealistic or
silly, dump 'em!

Morten.

+

[James H. Jenkins]

About investiture:

Here's the simple solution:

Ruler (Liege) Gives RP as a Grant action to his/her Vassal.
Perform Investiture Ceremony.

Now that new owner is invested, old ruler no longer collects RP.

Or, new gut kills old ruler via Birthright/ Heart puncture / There can
be only one... etc. Then takes the realm from the old ruler via
"Hostile takeover investiture."

Also, I recommend looking at the spirit of the rules, rather than their
exact wording, when resolving stuff like this.

So, the question then is: "Can a ruler step down, and give up the realm
without getting a sword thru the heart?"

"Yes." Ok, now how do we go about it?

Just a suggestion, I'm not trying to incite a riot here.

Hope this helps,

James H. Jenkins

PS > AD&D CDROM core rules is pretty good, just installed it, it will
help a lot, the mapping utility is pretty cool, and new character
generation/maintenance is a snap. a lot of cool features, WELL worth the
54 bucks I paid. Will DEfinitely improve my Birthright game, by making
it easier to manage info. ALSO, YOU MUST DOWNLOAD TSR's PATCH file from
TSR Core CD patch area online to get it to work properly, but that
installs no problem, and works great!

I only wish this technology had existed in the 70's!

- - James H. Jenkins

[Jan P. M. Arnoldus]

I'ld first like to thank the persons who reacted to my previous question
about undetectable lie V unreadable thoughts, your input was appreciated.

Now we go on to the next question.
In the Investiture as a realm action it says that the entire domain can
be invested. But it also says that the recipient of this domain must
spend RP equal to the Domain Power for this to work.
This would mean that when a person wants to step down from his position
(due to old age or whatever) he would have to find somebody who already
rules holdings to give them to.

He can't say this child of mine or this lieutenant (who at the moment
doesn't rule anything in his/her own name) will be my successor and
invest them with the domain.
No if he wants to do this he will have to commit suicide, whereupon his
designated heir recieves the Domain and then the old ruler would have to
be ressurrected.
I think this can't be right, in my opinion the investiture should be
possible. The only restriction is that the invested party will have to
spent RP's equal to the Domain Power as soon as he can. This means that a
child (An11) which is invested with a province9, law9 from his father
(An22) will have to spent 9RP in the first domain turn and 2rp in the
second to pay for the investiture. This should be seen as touring the
realm and getting to know the precise details of ruling it.

A bit later the success roll for this action is discussed. "Success is
automatic if the target is willing; if the target is unwilling, the
success number is a 10 modified by the difference between the bloodline
strength if the investor and the victim. If the investiture fails, the
victim retains control of his domain."

If I read this correctly the succes roll is always 10 if the target is
unwilling, this is because the difference in bloodline strength
between the same person is always 0.
The investor is the person who is giving up his power,
the investee is the one who gets the power,
the victim is according to the following sentence the person who wanted to
give up his power. Therefore there is no difference in bloodstrength
between the victim and the investor.
Okay this is nitpicking they probably meant the difference between the
investor, giver, and the recipient, investee.
But what constitutes willingness. since the recipient doesn't have to be
at the proceedings it is entirely possible that he isn't aware of them.
So how does this affect the action, is this willingness, unwillingness or
indifference.
Or did they mean that the investor, giver, could be unwilling to give to
the investee, recipient. This is the case in a war where for example
Ghoere has conquered Endier and wants to force Endier to investe his
realm to him. In this case the same question remains: What is
unwillingness, is it only when he remains convinced that he should rule
and only agrees under duress, or does investiture under the
influence of mindaffecting spells which convince him to agree also fall
under an unwilling investiture.

Reactions please

Jan Arnoldus

[Jan P. M. Arnoldus]

On Mon, 14 Jul 1997, Morten Helles wrote:

> Jan P. M. Arnoldus wrote:
>
> Regarding investiture as a realm action, I would have to agree with
> James: Follow the spirit of the game, and forget about the (rather
> silly/complex) rules. A regent should (by the help of a priest) be able
> to grant his realm/domain to ANYONE, including his son, lieutenant, etc.
> And, IMHO, the investiture should pass the regent's bloodline strength,
> provinces and holdings but not his/hers RP to the new ruler (the old
> regent's RP fizzle into nothingness as part of the investiture).
>
> Hey, think about Rogr Aglondier when he was Rogr Tilgentor, an UNBLOODED
> magician with NO holdings. He woke up one morning to find himself
> suddenly invested with the power of the previous regent. Rogr didn't
> even know he was invested! How do the rules explain that? They cannot,
> and remember: The rules are guidelines; if they seem unrealistic or
> silly, dump 'em!
>
> Morten.
>
> +