title discussion

Sun, 23 Oct 1994 14:17:10 -0400 (EDT)

>>Rick said:
>>Were the land holder titles valued based on some criteria, or just
>>arbitrary limits.

> Rich said:
> They're fairly arbitrary. Someone suggested that they go up
> slower, since it's too easy to become a duke now.

Were you thinking of a linear progression like:

1 - 5 Lord
6 - 10 Knight
11 - 15 Baron
16 - 20 Count
21 - 25 Earl
26 - 30 Marquis
31+ Duke

Or were you thinking of a non-linear progression like:

1 - 3 Lord
4 - 7 Knight
8 - 12 Baron
12 - 17 Count
18 - 24 Earl
25 - 32 Marquis
33+ Duke

Ya know, it would be kind of interesting, instead of amount of land
owned affecting a title, it could be the number of land owning nobles
pledged to you. Titles would then not only represent land control, but
political control (or clout) as well.

2 or more lords pledged to 1 knight, 2 or more knights to a baron, etc.
This would foster a more cooperative environment in order to gain
political control. In order to become a duke, it would take 127
nobles. Hmmm. Might be kind of restricting, but it is an interesting
concept dont't you think?

Nah! Unless titles meant something, like affecting persuasion skills,
then there really ain't a whole lot of incentives. Right now, a title
is just "chrome."

But then again, if I invested most of my NP into owning castles, I could
use my "wealth" and influence from pledged nobles, to role play a high
ranking official, that would need to focus on political control to
play Oly without really having a lot of physical assets to affect any
military or economic aspects. Gee, now I confused. What are your
thoughts? This should be a design post.


Main Index  |  Olympia  |  Arena  |  PBM FAQ  |  Links