Law Holdings

[TH - The Hunt]

In the original setting it was normal for realms to have only half law, even when developed, unless they were exceptionally authoritarian. We don't need to give incentives for ruling law all the way up to the maximum, if the regent doesn't want that kind of control (or RP generation, or troop training).

If we're going to buff law holdings, we should just bring back the ability they had to provide a buffer against any reduction in loyalty, not just the reductions from high taxes.

Re: Law claims, if two regents SERIOUSLY want to work out a tribute agreement to get around it for the sake of predictability, sure. But, if the guild or temple regent just wants to bully the law holder into providing free stability for them, a little martial law wouldn't be out of order.

[WB - Water's Blessing]

Guilders have too much income as ship maintenance has been reduced to 0 for coasters.
Gold cannot be used to bid on actions (other then espionage)

Landed Regents have had the ability to collect severe taxes restricted, to occasional or single province only.

So if they are out of balance, perhaps those changes need to be rolled back, rather then normalize other mechanics by viewing them through a force perspective of treating them as something they are not.

"Law claims represent interfering with another regents domain" It is not a tax, otherwise it would work regardless of whether or not the local guilds and temples are organized or not.

You and I are just going to disagree on this. I think it is a good mechanic and, regardless of what a book that was pushed out at the last minute as the product line was being shut down says, I think the game is better for the mechanic being normalized. I think mechanics that are conflictual are better than ones that are not because this is, in the end, a conflict management simulation. More sources of tension are better than fewer, imo.

You don't agree, and that's fine. It's a source of tension. So, some day, if we wind up with you operating in a law domain ran by me, you can plot my downfall when I start law claiming you every turn.

[YK - Yuri Khavlor]

Guilders have too much income as ship maintenance has been reduced to 0 for coasters.
Gold cannot be used to bid on actions (other then espionage)

Landed Regents have had the ability to collect severe taxes restricted, to occasional or single province only.

So if they are out of balance, perhaps those changes need to be rolled back, rather then normalize other mechanics by viewing them through a force perspective of treating them as something they are not.

"Law claims represent interfering with another regents domain" It is not a tax, otherwise it would work regardless of whether or not the local guilds and temples are organized or not.

You and I are just going to disagree on this. I think it is a good mechanic and, regardless of what a book that was pushed out at the last minute as the product line was being shut down says, I think the game is better for the mechanic being normalized. I think mechanics that are conflictual are better than ones that are not because this is, in the end, a conflict management simulation. More sources of tension are better than fewer, imo.

You don't agree, and that's fine. It's a source of tension. So, some day, if we wind up with you operating in a law domain ran by me, you can plot my downfall when I start law claiming you every turn.

Ok, we can disagree. You will be ignoring the published material which means we are not even playing the same game anymore at that point.

Your argument is also counterintuitive. Do you want conflict or normalized behaviour?

Is law claims better as a routine GB sharing mechanic or a tool selective used to enforce will in a conflict?

[TH - The Hunt]

Advantage of law serving as a buffer against all loyalty changes: The drawback of severe taxes becomes the lack of a buffer, rather than moment-by-moment unsustainability.

Loyalty loss is rarer than I'd like... Maybe it should happen more often. There were examples of events that would reduce the loyalty of an entire realm by one grade. A change in regent would be one.

Re: Law claims again, they're modest, automated, and non-destructive. So they work fine as a routine thing.

[WB - Water's Blessing]

Clearly, I think it's better as a routine GB sharing mechanic. But, just because something is normalized doesn't mean it's not a source of tension and conflict. Taxing corporations is a normalized behavior irl. It doesn't mean corporations like it and that there isn't conflict over it.

[YK - Yuri Khavlor]

Clearly, I think it's better as a routine GB sharing mechanic. But, just because something is normalized doesn't mean it's not a source of tension and conflict. Taxing corporations is a normalized behavior irl. It doesn't mean corporations like it and that there isn't conflict over it.

Ok why is it better as a routine mechanic and not a tool for Law for holders to interfere with other realms?

You previously only mentioned an Imbalance of GB generation.

It would seem if Law holding need improvement, balancing them around being by default detriment to other holdings, does not do that. If they are balanced that way, the ability to use your law holdings to interfere with others' holding is diminished. That tool is already default in play, and routine.

[WB - Water's Blessing]

It's a better mechanic because I would rather redistribute existing in-game wealth rather than introduce a new source of in-game wealth.

To me, contestation represents active interference. By allowing law holdings to contest or interact with any other kind of holding (save sources), you give them an active means to curb or curtail behavior. Furthermore, decrees only have real force for law regents. If you want to interfere with a guild you disapprove, you could issue a decree, enforced by your law holdings, that guild X cannot raise troops or build ships in your territories. There are other creative uses of decrees a law regent could use to similarly interfere in other areas of a domain's operation. So, for acts that require censure but do not warrant removal, a decree to curtail liberties could do the trick.

MF: Another advantage to having competing guilds/temples in your lands is that you can still get a lot out of law holdings without maximizing your law holdings. Law holding advantages are relative rather than absolute. So, making sure you have more law holdings than temple/guild regents have those kind of holdings is what really matters, not necessarily maximizing law holdings. It's only when a monopoly takes hold that you need to maximize law yourself, which sort of makes sense to me.

[YK - Yuri Khavlor]

It's a better mechanic because I would rather redistribute existing in-game wealth rather than introduce a new source of in-game wealth.

But is a better DEFAULT ROUTINE mechanic.

Option A- Law holder has it a tool, they can choose to use. That choice has meaning and impact.

Option B - The law holder is balanced around being forced to use that tool. They can choose not to but is at a disadvantage for doing so.


Without adding new sources of in-game wealth

Option A - Realms with Law holders support can effectively perform realm-wide severe taxes. If an undesirable regent enters the realm they have a tool for making it less profitable to do so, by using their legal authority to seize a portion of their operations.

Option B - Realms with law holders support are unbalanced against guild holders, so always by default use the law claim tool (to artificially balance them). If an undesirable regent enters the realm you only have action costing contests actions to make their life more difficult. There is the option to not use the tool against friendly guilders, but then they are choosing to play an unbalanced domain and it does not have a direct impact on the undesirable regent.

[DM Juan]

BirMail does not allow you to only law claim 1 guilder, it only allows a flag of yes/no to law claim all guilds/province/temples, per Law holding.

[YK - Yuri Khavlor]

BirMail does not allow you to only law claim 1 guilder, it only allows a flag of yes/no to law claim all guilds/province/temples, per Law holding.

Well, that's a design flaw, that has to be taken into consideration then. Unfortunate. I have always liked the escalating options for conflict that was developed for Birthright.