Vassal/Liege ranks stuff


  • Baron

    I have an idea for how vassal/liege ranks should work

    since these ranks are entierly out of lore, just say it doesnt matter if a vassal is the same rank as their leige, or even above it. Your rank is determined by what you built personally. All noble ascensions are voted on by the community.

    Resolved with Charter: https://forums.candarion.com/topic/64/charter-for-candarion/9 -Alric


  • Withdrawn Baron

    Supporty


  • Baron

    I like it.
    I'd like to add to this discussion this:
    All previous Lord+ are start at (Viscout or Baron).
    Anyone who was below that but thinks they should be promoted must get their previous liege to vouch and then community will vote to grant promotion or not.


  • Non-Participating Baron

    Not sure what I think about all noble ascensions being voted on, but I definitely think having vassals being able to be the same or higher rank as their liege is a good idea.


  • Baron

    i say start at baron


  • Baron

    I say start at baron as well


  • Baron

    Same. We shouldn't get FTP right off the bat.


  • Baron

    I also like the idea of vassals being whatever rank regardless of liege rank. I also think that everyone who was a Lord+ should become a Baron once spawn is done and land claims begin. Commoners and Esquires should, I think, be promoted to Lord following the completion of spawn if they contributed enough. But I would also be cool with their old liege vouching for their promotion to Lord based on their activity on Aldemeria!


  • Baron

    I'm not sure I'm on board with vassals having a higher rank than their liege.

    I'm sure someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but that's not how vassalage works. You don't have kings giving fealty to Barons.

    You could argue that if a liege goes inactive and a vassal overtakes them in rank, we should have a mechanic whereby that vassal becomes the liege? Otherwise it just wouldn't work.


  • Baron

    Well in lore as as far as the realm they would be a lower rank than the liege. But on the forums and for legal purposes they have more votes/ftps or whatever. The whole legal system is comepletley seperate from lore. If a vassal does the work to be a prince and the liege wont put in the work to become a count, the vassal can stay with the realm theve put this much effort into and still be rewarded. In this system also, a liege can only use their own builds to rank up, they cant have someone else do all the work and they are the ones reaping the benefits


  • Duke

    Im not on board with a vassal being higher rank then their liege.


  • Count

    I think this is a great idea.


  • Baron

    @Aevirath said in Vassal/Liege ranks stuff:

    I have an idea for how vassal/liege ranks should work

    since these ranks are entierly out of lore, just say it doesnt matter if a vassal is the same rank as their leige, or even above it. Your rank is determined by what you built personally. All noble ascensions are voted on by the community.

    After thinking on this and reading some responses. This kind-of makes the whole liege-vassal system pointless as well as gets rid of any incentive to want to take on vassals.


  • Baron

    I agree with Aron. While it's a good idea in theory, I think that a liege has to be the absolute power in their realm and it'll get too confusing for someone to be a duke in forums but a baron in game. I would not be opposed, however, to allowing a vassal to be the same rank as their liege -- I just think they shouldn't be able to go higher.


  • Count

    This doesn't have to be completely separate from lore.

    In my mind, the liege of the land holds the highest title, in the form of a sovereign title. (Ie The Valeyard) these "kings" are the leader based on the realms lore, whether that power is derived from bloodlines, vote, or whether he picked a certain toy as a child (reincarnation system)

    There is no reason a noble without a claim to the throne couldn't gain a bunch of land and become a higher rank in that sense, knowing that the one that started the realm will always have the highest (lore) rank in the realm.

    The only other caveat I have is that the realm owner still maintains control of ascensions in the form of vetoes. If a vassal meets the reqs, the community promotes, but if the liege does not want someone of the same or higher rank, he can say no. It is his realm to do with as he pleases. That is part of being a permanent vassal. I would assume the liege and vassal would talk about this BEFORE the vassal puts in all the work however


  • Baron

    I dont super care if vassals are allowed to be higher or same rank, but i do think if they can be the same rank its just as wierd as being a higher rank, so if we allow one we might as well allow the other.

    I do still think that promotions she be based only on the builds you do, not your vassals. Here are my reasons:

    1. Liege-vassal relationships should be about more than just somoene building for you to rank up, it should be about working together on a realm, and expanding lore, and whats best for both parties.

    2. If someone isn't doing the work themselves, they shouldn't reap the benefits. A count shouldn't be made a duke if they didnt build the requirements, becuase then a vassal (or group of vassals) would have done all the work but dont get the benefits of being a duke

    3. Taking that away doesnt take away all the incentive to be a vassal or to have vassals, it should be about what i said in reason


  • Baron

    I don't see where the old system is at fault here. The rank of the realm should be tied to the rank of the realm leader. Vassal works absolutely should count towards realm rank as the vassal has done work towards the realm. Regardless of who did it, the realm should advance. Now obviously there's a problem is 95% of the builds in a realm are vassal made, but thats the kind of thing which an ascension tour can address.

    In my opinion, realms will become incredibly dense if the overall requirements for ascension are individual rather than grouped.

    Lets say I need 5 settlements for a rank up. If I build 3 towns and my vassal builds 2 hamlets which don't count, I need to build 2 additional hamlets on top of their work, increasing the density of builds in the realm.

    For a realm with several vassals, towns are going to start getting very close to each other. If anything this is a dissentive to taking on vassals as you need to be fine with having settlements on top of each other, something I personally do not like.


  • Baron

    @TheValeyard said in Vassal/Liege ranks stuff:

    Now obviously there's a problem is 95% of the builds in a realm are vassal made, but thats the kind of thing which an ascension tour can address.

    This is the exact thing I don't want to have. They either count or they don't. This half-way measure just leaves room for people to get ridiculous.


  • Baron

    I fear that we're trying to overly complicate this and we're in danger of alienating people by doing so.


  • Count

    One of the big things to remember here is we are disassociating the ranks with actual server lore.

    [My thought process changed half way through writing this, but i'm leaving it crossed out in case it inspires anyone else.]

    If this is the case, maybe just have the same build reqs also apply towards the realm as a whole, with the only realm benefit being the naming convention.

    So I build enough for Baron, and my vassal, Publius, also builds enough for Baron. We both become barons, but the realm now has enough to qualify as a viscounty. Annisar holds the [lore] title of Grand Poobah of the Viscounty of Ornthas, but Annisar and Publius are still Barons for all the voting and meta-related stuff, since its now disassociated.

    Fuck it, its just the Realm of Ornthas, led by the lore-title of Grand Poobah. the realm is comprised of 2 baronies. It could be comprised of a Viscounty and a Barony, with the Baron being the Grand Poobah, and Viscount Publius being a powerful noble that still swears fealty to the Baron based on lore reasons.

    Either way, ranks should only be based on what you have personally built, not what others have done for you.

    @TheValeyard

    In my opinion, realms will become incredibly dense if the overall requirements for ascension are individual rather than grouped.

    Why can't the realms just become larger, as land claims were only barred based on whether you have actually used the land you have? If you have a bunch of vassals, they just keep expanding outwards, at whatever density is desired, and the Realm of Linirea is just made up of a collection of baronies, counties, duchies, etc, based on the individual players ranks.


Log in to reply
 

12
Online

229
Users

1.1k
Topics

5.2k
Posts