Noble ranks


  • Count

    Forum post dor discussion discord channel.

    Change ranks to commoner, Esquire, knight, baron, count, duke, prince, king, emperor.
    (Or something similar)

    Knight and up are considered nobles

    knight (vassal noble)
    Get vote.
    Build hold, including a manor or small castle or some medium sized administrative building?

    Baron (first rank where you can be a realm leader)
    Barony is slightly larger, the main hold and one hamlet.

    (Sidebar: do you start a realm at knight, but only get baron once you hit the baron build reqs?)

    Count
    County is bigger yet and 2 hamlets

    Duke,
    Reduce duchy to 2 counties? Or a combo of counties/baronies with min build numbers? Do anything to lessen the exponential rate?

    Prince
    2 duchies instead of 3?

    Do we maintain the capital building reqs? Or go with overall build reqs, so people can build less urban realms?

    Additional knight/ baron rank instead of lord makes vote take longer (maybe) but slightly streamline higher ranks so people still get progression. You should still be able to reach higher ranks as a vassal, knight shouldn't be considered a stopping point for people who enjoy being vassals.

    Im in the one vote no matter rank camp, so that influences my take. If high ranks retain more votes, don't reduce duke+ reqs

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


  • Baron

    I prefer this order Commoner, Esquire, Knight, Lord(vassal vote), Baron(can start own realm), Count, Duke, King, Emperor. I would be in favour of ditching the capital building reqs.


  • Baron

    My suggestion is thus

    Commoner (Start on server)

    Esquire (Can't be relinquished)

    Knight (1 Vote)

    Baron (Realm Start)

    Viscount (1 Vote (FTP) )

    Count ( 2 Vote (NPC) )

    Duke ( 2 Vote (2 FTP) )

    Prince (3 Vote)

    King (3 Vote (3 FTP)

    Emperor (4 Vote)


  • Baron

    Commoner -> Base Rank
    Esquire -> Here to stay
    Knight -> 1 Vote (approx old Lord)
    Baron -> Can found a realm
    Viscount -> Can start a co-build NPC realm with other Viscount+, first FTP (approx old Count)
    Count -> Can found solo NPC realms
    Duke -> 2 Votes, 2nd FTP
    Prince -> 3rd FTP
    King -> 3 Votes
    Emperor -> 3 Votes and also you're an emperor (basically a prestige rank?)


  • Count

    I like Aevirath's system.
    We should probably figure out rank requirements, and put it all together before finalizing anything though. A lot of this is on the assumption that these extra ranks will not follow the same exponential requirements pattern, but instead result in getting ranks a little more frequently, and give a better feeling of progression.


  • Non-Participating Baron

    now should we use more colors for ranks ?


  • Duke

    @Aevirath said in Noble ranks:

    My suggestion is thus

    Commoner (Start on server)

    Esquire (Can't be relinquished)

    Knight (1 Vote)

    Baron (Realm Start)

    Viscount (1 Vote (FTP) )

    Count ( 2 Vote (NPC) )

    Duke ( 2 Vote (2 FTP) )

    Prince (3 Vote)

    King (3 Vote (3 FTP)

    Emperor (4 Vote)

    I am fine with this system. It seems to offer a fair amount of voting power for those who have put in the time but not excessively and clear in game benefits such as NPC realms and FTP. ALthough @Aevirath When you say NPC do you mean they get 1 NPC realm or are just able to make NPC realms?


  • Baron

    @Aron said in Noble ranks:

    Commoner -> Base Rank
    Esquire -> Here to stay
    Knight -> 1 Vote (approx old Lord)
    Baron -> Can found a realm
    Viscount -> Can start a co-build NPC realm with other Viscount+, first FTP (approx old Count)
    Count -> Can found solo NPC realms
    Duke -> 2 Votes, 2nd FTP
    Prince -> 3rd FTP
    King -> 3 Votes
    Emperor -> 3 Votes and also you're an emperor (basically a prestige rank?)

    I like this system. I would also be fine with reducing the requirements for ranking up but not to a large extent — I.e. no 2-county duchies.

    Finally, I’d support changing the build requirements to a capital of a certain size plus a set number of buildings distributed in any way to allow more flexibility in realm creation and style.


  • Count

    @beijimon
    The voice discussion was a capital size, a total number of buildings, and a total number of settlements.


Log in to reply
 

10
Online

229
Users

1.1k
Topics

5.2k
Posts