Diplomatic Embassies

[Eosin the Red]

> Raesene Andu wrote:

> I like the idea of allowing the establishment of diplomatic embassies, but I`d have to say that the creation of an embassy would need the support of the realm regent who rules the province where you intend to establish the embassy. If an embassy is created against the wishes of the realm regent then that really just undermines the whole idea of the embassy.

>

> I would make the creation of embassies a court action, and make success automatic, but require the regent to first have a permission from the realm where he wishes to establish the embassy.

>

> I would also make it more like a constructon, and lower the maintenance cost of 0.5 GB a turn. Perhaps make it a mini palace, with 4 GB construction cost, 0.5 GB maintenance cost, and allow a +2 bonus to all diplomacy attempts with that realm. You could also allow a diplomatic embassy to give a bonus to creation of a spy network in the province.



I think that this is a dramatic improvement to the rules and would ease quite a few probelems encountered.



I use a little house rule in my game that has an embassy (when not contraindicated in RoE) with each landed regent that you share a province with.



FREX: Maesil Shippers has a diplomatic embassy with Ghoere and Mhoried. The WIT & CJS both have diplomatic embassies with Endier. Avanil has Embassies with Diemed, Tournen, Brosengae, Mieres, and Taeghas. The exceptions to this rule are in biligerent holdings - niether Ghoere nor Mhoried have embassies though both own law in each others realms.



This does not allow SRT to have embassies with SAS or PCE.



Anyhow....I like the improvements.



Randy

[kgauck]

Embassies aren`t buildings, they are groups of people. Every time you

employ a diplomatic action you are sending an embassy who walks from the

location of the sending ruler to the location of the recieving ruler,

thereby passing through eveything on their route.



When permenent embassies become common in Renaissance Italy, they still

refer to the group of people, its just that those folks have rented a nice

place to reside. For quite a while the embassy as a palce would only refer

to the residence of the ambassador. The embassy still refers to the people

sent. Only when the functions of the ambassador become more bureaucratic

(19th century) do the needs of the embassy become such that the residence of

the ambassador and the location of the embassy as a palce cease to be the

same places.



For our purposes, we have no reason to adopt 19th or 20th century notions of

diplomatic practice. Hence the embassy refers to the people who are with

the ambassador, nuncio, or legate. If you watch the movie Elizabeth, you

see an embassy from Spain in the person of Alvaro de la Quadra, you see an

embassy from France in the person of the Duc d`Anjou, and you see two secret

embassies, one of Walsingham to Mary d`Guise and the Papal mission sent to

Norfolk in the person of John Ballard.



Diplomats such as these travel under the old Heraldric rules, so they are

always presumed to be under a flag of truce and personally representing the

ruler who sent them. You can`t arrest Alvaro de la Quadra and more than

Henry V could arrest Montjoy, the herald who visits him throughout the

play/movie. If you think Alvaro is up to no good, say funding Catholic

opponants like Norfolk, coordinating the Catholic opposition, hiring former

friends to become agents of His Most Catholic Majesty, then all you can do

is send him back to his master. Any attack on his person is interpreted as

an attack on the person of the other ruler, because an ambassador is just a

stand in for the ruler who can`t be there. A nuncio is a stand-in who is

authorized to talk for a ruler, but can take no action. A legate is a

stand-in who can act (say sign a treaty) but cannot speak for the ruler. An

ambassador can both speak and act for the ruler.



The diplomat as a form of herald is protected by Cuiraecen. One might

reasonably assume that mistreating diplomats, violating the code of

heraldry, will offend temples of Cuiraecen. Further, Cuiraecen has

influence with Haelyn, Nesirie, Eleole, and Laerme, and so violating the

code of heralds could potentially cause problems with any or all of these

dieties. Lastly, he who mistreats heralds, has his own heralds mistreated.

If Cuiraecen were to withdraw from you the protection of your heralds, your

heralds would be fair game for any mischief.



Kenneth Gauck

kgauck@mchsi.com

[Eosin the Red]

> Kenneth Gauck

>> Any attack on his person is interpreted as an attack on the person of the other ruler, because an ambassador is just a stand in for the ruler who can`t be there. A nuncio is a stand-in who is authorized to talk for a ruler, but can take no action. A legate is a stand-in who can act (say sign a treaty) but cannot speak for the ruler. An ambassador can both speak and act for the ruler.



>> The diplomat as a form of herald is protected by Cuiraecen. One might reasonably assume that mistreating diplomats, violating the code of heraldry, will offend temples of Cuiraecen. Further, Cuiraecen has influence with Haelyn, Nesirie, Eleole, and Laerme, and so violating the code of heralds could potentially cause problems with any or all of these dieties. Lastly, he who mistreats heralds, has his own heralds mistreated. If Cuiraecen were to withdraw from you the protection of your heralds, your heralds would be fair game for any mischief.



Great synopsis. Consider it yoinked.



Randy

[irdeggman]

Originally posted by kgauck@Oct 26 2003, 05:03 PM
Embassies aren`t buildings, they are groups of people. Every time you

employ a diplomatic action you are sending an embassy who walks from the

location of the sending ruler to the location of the recieving ruler,

thereby passing through eveything on their route.

Good detail Kenneth. The 'benefit' from having a permanent building is that (in BR terms) a mini-court could be applied to modifiy actions. This would be reflective of how well the delegates represent themselves and "suck up", if you will, to those they are trying to sway. Good surroundings definitely have an influence on how well the discussions go.

[kgauck]

----- Original Message -----

From: "irdeggman" <brnetboard@BIRTHRIGHT.NET>

Sent: Monday, October 27, 2003 4:19 AM





> The `benefit` from having a permanent building is that (in BR terms)

> a mini-court could be applied to modifiy actions. This would be

> reflective of how well the delegates represent themselves and "suck up",

> if you will, to those they are trying to sway. Good surroundings

> definitely have an influence on how well the discussions go.



I think the easiest way to reflect this is to allow rulers to spend GB to

effect diplomacy actions. Such spending reflects not only the magnificence

of your embassy but gifts for the other ruler, research, bribes, and what

not. One must not underestimate the importance of magnificence. While its

importance will vary, its nature will vary more, because nearly everyone is

impressed by magnificence. Not everyone is impressed by legal

technicalities, elegant prose, genealogical claims, or sound argumentation.

Not everyone is swayed by bribes, gifts, flattery, or other trickery. The

person who has no interest in any form of magnificence is a true ascetic.



Kenneth Gauck

kgauck@mchsi.com

[Osprey]

Kenneth, I really like your treatise on medieval/Renaissance diplomacy, Cerilian heralds, and on magnificence. Well-written&#33; I might add that in Celtic tradition bards operated under a similar assumption of truce and neutrality, although if they stepped in and took a side they effectively relinquished that protection. I think the same might apply to heralds and emissaries: if caught engaging in illicit activities, do they still enjoy the protection of Cuiraecen?

Mechanically, I think the embassy rules that I proposd actually do fit in with the historical model rather nicely; the 1 GB seasonal maintenance isn&#39;t too much of an expense when we figure that skilled emissaries aren&#39;t cheap to maintain at a high standard of living. The main advantage of the embassy is in their permanent

Likewise, I think palaces adding to diplomacy effects represent a display of magnificence - that is precisely their purpose.

And all of these things are quite expensive means of gaining diplomatic advantages, so I don&#39;t think we need to worry about them getting out of hand in terms of balance.