Slow Domain Turn Resolution/Tax

[rcantin@oricom.ca (Robin]

From Bob, reacting to Eric's message:
> Well first of all unless you are the vassal guilder for a nation that
>"king" is not your
>king. He does not rule you he just happens to own the property around
>your guilds.

We could have a historian's debate on that one! In many countries, the
regents (dukes or whatever) administered the land, itself being the
property of the king (or High King). Because a guilder has the permission
to build a warehouse upon it doesn't take the property away from the king.
But let's continue...

> The rulers of nations in Birthright have a lot of power and to allow
>them to take
>from the guilders and templars who are not their subjects just makes
>them worse.

Not their subjects?!? Even though the High priest may live in another
domain, the local lord can still tax the temple on the lands he has charge
of.
Anyway, we already discussed on this list that guilders had much power,
because of the incredible amounts of money they can come to hoard. Taxation
by law holdings is the least we can allow to limit that effect.

>If you can not picture the poor king controlled by a rich merchant I
>would suggest
>reading the Spider's Test. It gives a very clear example of what should
>be the power structure of Anuire.

The Birthright campaing setting was built upon the balance between three
political powers: military, financial and spiritual. That makes the setting
interesting for a large variety of classes. If you want a world dominated
by guilders controlling everything from the shadows, that fine, but keep in
mind that's not the way most of us play the game.

> The king basically asks permission of the Guilder to allow land to be
>added to his domain.
>And the guilder denied permission because the expansion would give power
>over a river to the king.

This looks more like the Dole Corporation in Central America than a
medieval setting...

>basically If you are a powerful king you should demand a tax from the
>guilders in your domain.
>say 1 GB per temple or guild owned. Save the claims by law holdings for
>added punishment.
>And if the guilders are bigger than you I would lay off because any
>desent DM would have
>the Guilders or Templars give the king a swift kick in the a$$.

No comments...

> Bob R.

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

[Robert Ripley]

Robin Cantin wrote:

> >From Bob, reacting to Eric's message:
> > Well first of all unless you are the vassal guilder for a nation
> that
> >"king" is not your
> >king. He does not rule you he just happens to own the property around
>
> >your guilds.
>
> We could have a historian's debate on that one! In many countries, the
>
> regents (dukes or whatever) administered the land, itself being the
> property of the king (or High King). Because a guilder has the
> permission
> to build a warehouse upon it doesn't take the property away from the
> king.
> But let's continue...

well what I am referring to is a strong Guilder with guilds in a nation
weaker than himself. I would think el-Hadid could buy and sell Ilien if
he wanted to.

> > The rulers of nations in Birthright have a lot of power and to allow
>
> >them to take
> >from the guilders and templars who are not their subjects just makes
> >them worse.
>
> Not their subjects?!? Even though the High priest may live in another
> domain, the local lord can still tax the temple on the lands he has
> charge
> of.
> Anyway, we already discussed on this list that guilders had much
> power,
> because of the incredible amounts of money they can come to hoard.
> Taxation
> by law holdings is the least we can allow to limit that effect.

The question of wether or not to tax would be a question of the balance
of power. To blatantly tax everyone on your land should get you
attacked.

> >If you can not picture the poor king controlled by a rich merchant I
> >would suggest
> >reading the Spider's Test. It gives a very clear example of what
> should
> >be the power structure of Anuire.
>
> The Birthright campaing setting was built upon the balance between
> three
> political powers: military, financial and spiritual. That makes the
> setting
> interesting for a large variety of classes. If you want a world
> dominated
> by guilders controlling everything from the shadows, that fine, but
> keep in
> mind that's not the way most of us play the game.
>
No none of my Birthright worlds are dominated by guilders... What I am
talking about is the need for parity between the Rulers of Nations and
the Rulers of Guilds and Temples. I would think that some weaker nations
can be easily pushed around by a guilder or templar.

> > The king basically asks permission of the Guilder to allow land to
> be
> >added to his domain.
> >And the guilder denied permission because the expansion would give
> power
> >over a river to the king.
>
> This looks more like the Dole Corporation in Central America than a
> medieval setting...

Exactly! A strong Guilder is pushing around a weak nation. Not every
nation is like this, obviously, but some are. And whether it belongs in
a medieval setting or not is determined by you knowledge of history.

1. Medieval Russia was basically controlled by the Russian Orthodox
Church for many centuries.
2. Medieval Italian merchants ran the Italian pennisula for many
decades.
There are more but you see my point.

- --

Bob R.
- -The Anti-Birthright-
************************************************** *****************************

PBeM- Birthright, Regents of the Southern Marches
http://home.earthlink.net/~bobripley/index.html
http://home.earthlink.net/~bobripley/page3.html
bobripley@earthlink.net
************************************************** *****************************