Results 1 to 7 of 7
Thread: Law Holding Revenue
11-24-2008, 09:22 PM #1
Law Holding Revenue
So, how do you guys think law holdings should get their revenue?
In 2.0 it was a bizaare table, in 3.0 it was this 1/3rd of holding level business, in RoE (a very well-thought out BR PBEM) its (% of Law held in province X tax rate) taken from each holding.
Taking from a holding adds a lot of math, which is probably why the 3.0/3.5 guys decided to go with 1/3rd holding level.
If you go with "takings", I think it could be an attack, similiar to the discussion in that other thread. A law attack vs the holding. Success = take your "fair share" of their revenue.
Considering a small anuire southern coast campaign, you have hundreds of holdings. That's just not realistic. The dice have to be taken away from collections entirely, so ok.
Sounds like a RoE method works best, if you have a good spreadsheet or database program (I have the latter, Domino code base).
Law Holdings also generate "soft" income for the province ruler in terms of being able to tax more from the province, and from being able to extort/get bribes from guilds/temples in exchange for law holding support, so maybe they don't need intrinsic income.
Last edited by Arentak; 11-24-2008 at 09:25 PM.
11-24-2008, 09:25 PM #2
- Join Date
- Jan 2004
I dislike fractions other than halves. I prefer the following income scheme:
Provinces: Light taxation (gives +1 bonus to province attitude) = 0.5GB/lvl; Moderate = 1GB/lvl; Severe = 1.5GB/lvl
Law: 0.5GB/lvl; if holdings are 50% of province level, Moderate taxation has no loyalty cost; if 100%, Severe taxation has no loyalty cost
I have also considered eliminating the standard assumption of taxation on temples and guilds (normally games seem to assume that the landed regent takes 1/4 to 1/3 of their income in taxes levied on those regents). I'd replace it with saying that Severe taxation, while generating 1.5GB/level, is harmful to commerce, charity, and productivity, causing Guild and Temple regents to suffer a 25% loss of gross income. This replaces the tax, but obviously damages guilds more than temples because it's not an even exchange of trade route income. I actually like that this variant works that way. Conversely, BTW, Light taxation would allow temples and guilds to multiply their gross incomes by 25% in increased prosperity.
Last edited by Rowan; 11-24-2008 at 09:32 PM.
11-24-2008, 10:12 PM #3
- Join Date
- Oct 2006
- Chelmsford, Essex, England
hmm, I wish we'd go decimal...
strictly brcs was 1/3 level plus the chance to shake down others for 1d6 GB - the latter aspect only really handy for holdings representing pirates and non-scaled to the holding level.
ROE is more complex since it has both prosperity (loosely equivalent to domain morale) and tax levels, and given the normal book-keeping issues in BR that is enough to put off many - RoE II's look-up tables are giving me headaches as it is and I'm a tax geek...
Personally I like the 1/3 per level as it is simple and follows other holding income methods (i.e. it represents various duties, stamps, land rights, etc and not really linked to any particular holding) and the ability to levy tax (say as a court action which can be opposed or imposition of .25 tax per law level on the chosen holding) as that stays fairly simple.
Rowan's method is nice too - I particularly like the non-zero sum aspect of it. But the province holder gains 50% income so if other holdings are low then overall you could gain - this would however ignore invisible losses by sub-zero holdings that would presumably proliferate in such a system.
Tax is not a zero sum game as high taxes deter the underlying activity in the first place (i.e. a merchant can earn 10 GB, if you levy taxes to take 7 GB they say 'sod it' and go somewhere else to do business - they don't settle for 3 GB) and encourages perverse economic behavior (i.e. spending time on non-productive activity like tax evasion).
11-25-2008, 01:17 PM #4
11-25-2008, 01:23 PM #5
11-25-2008, 01:35 PM #6
New topics are a pain
reserved for later..
11-26-2008, 07:40 PM #7
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
By bbeau22 in forum BRCS 4th EditionReplies: 62Last Post: 08-28-2008, 12:49 PM
By Bryon in forum The Royal LibraryReplies: 1Last Post: 06-09-2007, 02:57 PM
By mayiuchung in forum The Royal LibraryReplies: 16Last Post: 02-07-2007, 09:02 PM
By Question in forum BRCS 3.0/3.5 EditionReplies: 9Last Post: 12-05-2005, 04:41 PM
By Birthright-L in forum The Royal LibraryReplies: 2Last Post: 04-24-2002, 03:15 PM