Re: Cost of building castles?

C.M. Yearsley (
Tue, 16 Nov 1993 16:51:18 +0000 (GMT)

I agree with the criticisms of earlier ideas. Here's a couple of
suggestions that are simpler that some of the other ideas.

Both are based on this proposal:

> Proposal:
> o Eliminate 2X tax base increase for castle
> o Create a "manor house" that can collect taxes for a location.
> o Castles allow player to TAX in neighboring regions, or
> to GRANT the ability to tax to another unit or player.
> Problems:
> o Currently tax bases are vulnerable to pillaging, since taxes
> are not collected until the end of the month. This gives an
> incentive to location owners to guard against pillaging.
> The TAX command could be used early in the month, thus reducing
> the yield for later pillage attempts to zero. This is bad.

Possibility 1

As above. The pillage limitation is no problem: consider this.

Taxes have been collected this month from a province. Someone tries
to pillage and gets no money. However, the damage they do _still_happens_
as normal. Thus next turn the tax base is less. Even if they fail to
'pillage' in time next month, they can still starve the castle out
by destroying its tax base. In the present system, if I pillage a province
just before you, won't that diminish your catch in a similar way?

Someone said it's boring to have a noble go round and round collecting taxes.
I don't see he'd be more bored than my noble who spends his whole life
going round and round in circles fishing!

Possibility 2

At the end of each month, tax income from each province is credited to the
castle without a noble carrying it. The peasants come to render their taxes
themselves. This is 'action-at-a-distance' and I'm not as keen on this option.
It still seems a fair idea, though.

My conclusion

I like option 1, for another reason that's not been pushed very hard. If I
build a castle, I can 'GRANT' tax income from a province to another player
in return for services rendered. This seems a very elegant and appropriate
means of rewarding service. He gets the money, I get the province defended
for free....if he's trustworthy! It offers many possibilities for roleplaying
and player interaction.

It has no complicated bonuses and penalties, no action-at-a-distance,
nothing delayed, lots of possibilities for player interaction.
'Pillage' still works in a credible, realistic way. Starving out the
castle works. The new orders 'TAX', 'GRANT' are similar to the
'pillage' command we already have, and the permissions system we're
sure to get at some point.

I also really like the 'manor house' idea. In the same way that there's
"nice" and "nasty" ways of having your nobles serve you, I'd like to be
able to have loyal vassals rendering their taxes to me. I don't _want_
to have wandering bands of brigands pillaging if I'm roleplaying the good
guys! Manors fit in with the game and could be nice for someone that can't
afford a castle.

> One way around this problem might be to collect taxes from subject
> provinces at the end of the month, but not allow them to be gathered
> by the player with TAX until the following month. Thus, tax revenue
> for the central castle would come at month end, but taxes from neighboring
> provinces would have to be collected with TAX the following month.

This is a mess.

The idea of bonuses/penanties for pillaging and guarding also, IMHO,
seems messy.

Comments, folks?

Chris Yearsley

Main Index  |  Olympia  |  Arena  |  PBM FAQ  |  Links