Another `Rules` Question ...

[Dan]

>But reason would dictate that if the vassals decree that all their law
>holdings will support to collection of taxes in these provinces (and the
>vassal regents thereby orders this to be done), I would rule the effect to be
>equivalent to the taxing provincial regent owning all possible law holdings.
>(Since you indicated all possible law being divided amongst the two vassals
>and single liege lord.

And then the law owning vassal could take their legal share of the
money made by using their law holdings to pick into the Regent's earnings.
This solves the problem as to where the Rjurik jarls get their cash.

Bearcat
lcgm@elogica.com.br
Come visit Bearcat's Birthright Homepage at:
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Cavern/6204

[Jim Cooper]

Hello,

I have another question for all you out their -->

Okay: Say, for instance, you have a fighter regent; he has 1/3rd the
law holdings in his domain. Now lets say another 2 regents have the
other 2/3rds of the law holding, so that all the possible available law
holdings are taken in each province. Now lets say these other 2 regents
are the vassals of the ruling fighter regent.

Question: Does the fighter regent have control of all available law
holdings, for the purpose of taxation, so that this regent can ignore up
to 2 grades of loyalty change in each province?

Thanks for any responses,
Darren

[James Ruhland]

>
> Okay: Say, for instance, you have a fighter regent; he has 1/3rd the
> law holdings in his domain. Now lets say another 2 regents have the
> other 2/3rds of the law holding, so that all the possible available law
> holdings are taken in each province. Now lets say these other 2 regents
> are the vassals of the ruling fighter regent.
>
> Question: Does the fighter regent have control of all available law
> holdings, for the purpose of taxation, so that this regent can ignore up
> to 2 grades of loyalty change in each province?
>
I personally would rule that as long as his vassals supported him with
their law holdings he would benifit from them; I.E. be able to ignore up to
2 grades of loyalty change.

[Trizt]

On 26-Jan-98, Jim Cooper (Jim_Cooper@bc.sympatico.ca) wrote about [BIRTHRIGHT]
- - Another 'Rules' Question ...:

- ->Okay: Say, for instance, you have a fighter regent; he has 1/3rd the
- ->law holdings in his domain. Now lets say another 2 regents have the
- ->other 2/3rds of the law holding, so that all the possible available law
- ->holdings are taken in each province. Now lets say these other 2 regents
- ->are the vassals of the ruling fighter regent.
- ->Question: Does the fighter regent have control of all available law
- ->holdings, for the purpose of taxation, so that this regent can ignore up
- ->to 2 grades of loyalty change in each province?

It's a bit of a "yes and no", yes in the case that the vassals are willing to
support the regent on the cost of their own authority. By leting the regent to
gain that benefit it will mean that they will loose money/work/food from the
pesant which lives in the estates which they do controll as they will be more
taxed by the "crown". They loose partly the controll of the arme forces they
have in the area too.

No as, only 1/3 of the population "supports" the regent, the rest are loyal to
the vassals and would see any "help" from the vassals as something the regent
forces them to do and will do even more resistance than before, even start a
rebelion against the regent.

The vassal has nothing to win on a such cooperation, I don't think they would
support the regent and therefore I would rule for a No (if I had been a kind
and nice DM I maybe would have allowed a one grade loyalty to be excluded).


//Trizt of Ward^RITE

-

[Ed Stark]

At 12:53 AM 1/26/98 -0600, you wrote:
>>
>> Okay: Say, for instance, you have a fighter regent; he has 1/3rd the
>> law holdings in his domain. Now lets say another 2 regents have the
>> other 2/3rds of the law holding, so that all the possible available law
>> holdings are taken in each province. Now lets say these other 2 regents
>> are the vassals of the ruling fighter regent.
>>
>> Question: Does the fighter regent have control of all available law
>> holdings, for the purpose of taxation, so that this regent can ignore up
>> to 2 grades of loyalty change in each province?
>>
>I personally would rule that as long as his vassals supported him with
>their law holdings he would benifit from them; I.E. be able to ignore up to
>2 grades of loyalty change.
>
I would agree with this agreement. ;-)

Vassalage is something we have left a little up in the air officially,
because it is such a situational and roleplaying rich construct. Vassalage
may take on many forms. In our own playtests it is extremely entertaining
to watch players negotiate the terms of vassalage.

In most cases, though, I would certainly rule that the fighter whose
vassals control the other law holdings gains the loyalty benefit as long as
his vassals don't break their oaths or rebel.

BTW, vassalage is a great way to squeeze out more RP. Let's say the Baron
of a particular realm controls the law holdings. He's raking in a bunch of
RP for the province and law ratings. If he takes on a thief/guilder as a
guildmaster vassal, he suddenly adds at least some of her RP (from guilds
and trade routes) to his whole. If he's got a priest holder as a vassal as
well, he's got some serious control.

This explains, in part, why so many medieval kingdoms had state religions
and control over the economy. While their long term results may have been
debatable (and their motives questionable), in BR the rules reflect the
benefits of delegation and centralization.


-- ->-- ->-- ->--@
Ed Stark
Game Designer, Wizards of the Coast/TSR Division
Asst. Brand Manager, BIRTHRIGHT/GREYHAWK/MARVEL Group
TSR Website: http://www.tsrinc.com
(soon to be http://www.tsr.com)

[Bryan Ruther]

Jim Cooper wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I have another question for all you out their -->
>
> Okay: Say, for instance, you have a fighter regent; he has 1/3rd the
> law holdings in his domain. Now lets say another 2 regents have the
> other 2/3rds of the law holding, so that all the possible available law
> holdings are taken in each province. Now lets say these other 2 regents
> are the vassals of the ruling fighter regent.
>
> Question: Does the fighter regent have control of all available law
> holdings, for the purpose of taxation, so that this regent can ignore up
> to 2 grades of loyalty change in each province?
>
> Thanks for any responses,
> Darren

Yes, IF the other regents actively support the fighter.

Bryan
- --
Mankind being originally equals in the order of creation,
the equality could only be destroyed by some subsequent
circumstance...
Thomas Paine, Common Sense