> > Query: I a regent of one country has in his army a unit of knights of
> Haelyn,
> > and say he attacks a neighbouring kingdom where haelyn's church has
> > worshippers, do you believe the knights would agree with the regents orders
> > to Attack? Or would they refuse on the premise that to attack would mean
> > killing fellow worshippers?
> >
> I have -always- wanted to know just that! Would an army revolt if you told
> them something that threatened their lives, like attacking an army 10X their
> size, and if so, what table (if any) would be used?

I wonder that too. I also had a case where my PCs were Dhoesone and the templars,
guilders,etc in that area and the lead PC (the landed one) attacked Thurazor. Some may
remember this battle from a while ago, well, if you wanted to know, it has just ended with
the PCs victorious. Well I got a new ansheglien that took over about 1/2 during the war
and he lived so...
Anyway, they kept throwing wave after wave of troops at the goblins. They'd fight a
battle and kill a goblin archers and wolfriders (BTW-I ruled that wolfriders can move
through forest like unmounted guys) but lose an infrantry and two pikemen. Not to mention
he insited in using his knights and archers in the most dense forest in Anuire (or one
of). So he kept going on like that mustering more guys and sending them up. I threw in a
few castles to slow him down but it didn't do much. Well my point is, are there any rules
governing loyalty and losing wars? I mean if you win a battle against a traditional foe,
all places get +1. Why not the opposite? A bad war means -1 to all. In my game I warned
the PC when the human death toll was around 1500 that the people were getting upset. He
won the war quickly afterwards but if he lost any more people... I wanted to warn him
before there was a loyalty change.
Hope I didn't ramble to much :)

- -Andrew