Results 1 to 4 of 4
  1. #1
    L.Willett
    Guest

    Lah Holdings vs Loyalty

    >I have a bit of trouble with the 'Law holdings and Loyalty' rule (RB, p.
    >47). A ruler who controls all L.H. ignores two grades of change in loyalty.
    >Does it mean it takes a three-grade chage ON THE SAME TURN to affect the
    >loyalty rating, or that loyalty drops once there have been three changes ON
    >SUBSEQUENT TURNS?
    >
    >I'd go for the second option, since it seems to me the first one allows far
    >too much abuse to be tolerated by the folk, but perhaps I didn't get this
    >right at all. How do you deal with that in your campaings?

    Personally, I find severe taxes, not severe enough. What with owning all
    the law holdings, leadership checks and agitation; a regent can ignore 4 !
    levels of loyalty change; which is nothing compared to the 2 levels for
    severe taxes.
    Severe taxation, should be just that SEVERE !

    -

  2. #2
    rcantin@oricom.ca (Robin
    Guest

    Lah Holdings vs Loyalty

    I have a bit of trouble with the 'Law holdings and Loyalty' rule (RB, p.
    47). A ruler who controls all L.H. ignores two grades of change in loyalty.
    Does it mean it takes a three-grade chage ON THE SAME TURN to affect the
    loyalty rating, or that loyalty drops once there have been three changes ON
    SUBSEQUENT TURNS?

    I'd go for the second option, since it seems to me the first one allows far
    too much abuse to be tolerated by the folk, but perhaps I didn't get this
    right at all. How do you deal with that in your campaings?

    Robin


    Webmaster of the Direct Democracy Pages
    http://www.oricom.ca/~rcantin/AIntro.html
    Les Pages Democratie Directe
    http://www.oricom.ca/~rcantin/Introduction.html

  3. #3
    Eric Beauchesne
    Guest

    Lah Holdings vs Loyalty

    - ----------
    > From: Robin Cantin
    > To: birthright@MPGN.COM
    > Subject: [BIRTHRIGHT] - Lah Holdings vs Loyalty
    > Date: 28 avril, 1997 10:02
    >
    > I have a bit of trouble with the 'Law holdings and Loyalty' rule (RB, p.
    > 47). A ruler who controls all L.H. ignores two grades of change in
    loyalty.
    > Does it mean it takes a three-grade chage ON THE SAME TURN to affect the
    > loyalty rating, or that loyalty drops once there have been three changes
    ON
    > SUBSEQUENT TURNS?
    >
    > I'd go for the second option, since it seems to me the first one allows
    far
    > too much abuse to be tolerated by the folk, but perhaps I didn't get this
    > right at all. How do you deal with that in your campaings?
    >
    > Robin

    In my campains, I use the first option because to get all the law holdings
    is theorically (sorry for the spelling, it's a direct translation from
    French) very difficult... only the 2 greatest rulers (in the sens of most
    powerfuls) are in this case. If you have all the law holdings, it means
    that nobody gets the power to say a word on the matter of law in your
    domain; not the temple, not the guilds that love to control at least some
    bit of the law nor yours "ennemi" neighbours that whant to dictate
    everything you do!
    When one of my player is becoming to powerful in law holding, some
    powerful people is interested in contesting the holdings( maybe a big
    traders guild or someone who wants something of the land for himself...
    And don't forget that severe taxation was the standart in Middle-Age, the
    law, supported by the army or maybe the army supported by the law, was
    able to keep the land almost quiet, even in time of war and it took many
    centuries of oppressing taxes and law before it conclude in a revolution...
    Hope it helps and you understand what I tried to write...

    Éric

  4. #4
    Jonathan Picklesimer
    Guest

    Lah Holdings vs Loyalty

    On Tue, 29 Apr 1997, Eric Beauchesne wrote:

    > Hope it helps and you understand what I tried to write...
    >=20
    > =C9ric

    Eric,

    Very nice. Your English is better than most people I know whose native=20
    language is English. Good points. The oppressed find it terribly=20
    difficult to rise above their oppressors. Otherwise Mur-Kilad and=20
    Markazor and Keirgaard would have thrown off the Gorgon centuries ago.

    jsp

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. stabilization (was Holdings Loyalty)
    By Birthright-L in forum The Royal Library
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 04-25-2002, 06:34 AM
  2. Holdings Loyalty
    By geeman in forum The Royal Library
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 04-24-2002, 03:06 PM
  3. War & loyalty
    By Memnoch in forum MPGN Mailinglist archive 1996-1999
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-15-1999, 04:19 AM
  4. War & loyalty
    By Kenneth Gauck in forum MPGN Mailinglist archive 1996-1999
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-15-1999, 03:49 AM
  5. War & loyalty
    By Tim Nutting in forum MPGN Mailinglist archive 1996-1999
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-15-1999, 01:13 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
BIRTHRIGHT, DUNGEONS & DRAGONS, D&D, the BIRTHRIGHT logo, and the D&D logo are trademarks owned by Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and are used by permission. ©2002-2010 Wizards of the Coast, Inc.