|
|
Post by Ymbert Montgomery on Sept 13, 2019 14:54:06 GMT
I'm not against this, but does anyone else have any views before I make it official?
|
|
|
|
Post by Ymbert Montgomery on Sept 13, 2019 15:21:29 GMT
Actually, one big question. How would this have worked if Huillaume had joined the King's Musketeers?
I'm also going to say that if implemented "regimental friend insulted" is possible reason for a challenge but it will be voted on rather than automatic. And "regimental friend duelled" definitely isn't cause; duels are matters of honour and aren't supposed to be some kind of chain reaction!
|
|
|
|
Post by huillaume on Sept 13, 2019 15:51:29 GMT
Actually, one big question. How would this have worked if Huillaume had joined the King's Musketeers? Well, the first point I suggested in those changes was:
After all, how likely is a Cardinal Guardsman to reach the King's Musketeers barracks (or vice versa) without being challenged beyond his capacity?
|
|
|
|
Post by huillaume on Sept 29, 2019 11:08:52 GMT
Another suggestion:
Should anyone court the paramour of someone that is in the front, and this attempt is made public, he would lose for this turn (only) 1d6 SP, modified by +1 if the character in the front is mentioned or promoted, cummulative, as he's viewed as taking advantage from the current beau being fighting for the King (and a hero, if MiD or promotion is obtained).
The lady would lose the same amount of SPs.
|
|
|
|
Post by gaston on Sept 29, 2019 15:45:21 GMT
Another suggestion:
Should anyone court the paramour of someone that is in the front, and this attempt is made public, he would lose for this turn (only) 1d6 SP, modified by +1 if the character in the front is mentioned or promoted, cummulative, as he's viewed as taking advantage from the current beau being fighting for the King (and a hero, if MiD or promotion is obtained).
The lady would lose the same amount of SPs.
Well, since if the attempt is successful it automatically becomes public (and nullifies any SPs the gentleman may have gained from courting the lady in the first place) isn't this basically an attempt to 'ring fence' mistresses so that their beaux can neglect them with impunity ? |
|
|
|
Post by huillaume on Sept 29, 2019 18:44:21 GMT
Another suggestion:
Should anyone court the paramour of someone that is in the front, and this attempt is made public, he would lose for this turn (only) 1d6 SP, modified by +1 if the character in the front is mentioned or promoted, cummulative, as he's viewed as taking advantage from the current beau being fighting for the King (and a hero, if MiD or promotion is obtained).
The lady would lose the same amount of SPs.
Well, since if the attempt is successful it automatically becomes public (and nullifies any SPs the gentleman may have gained from courting the lady in the first place) isn't this basically an attempt to 'ring fence' mistresses so that their beaux can neglect them with impunity ?
I'm not sure what do you mean here...
This would not allow anyone to neglect her paramour, just protect him for amyone prrofiting from his abscence when at the front (campaigning), and, as you say, the effect is only for one turn, while having the paramour is for each turn...
|
|
|
|
Post by gaston on Sept 29, 2019 19:39:09 GMT
I'm not sure what do you mean here...
What I'm saying is that this seems designed to allow characters to serve at the front with no risk of losing their mistresses while they are away - because the SP loss means that it's not worth it for anyone else to court them... |
|
|
|
Post by huillaume on Sept 30, 2019 6:50:50 GMT
I'm not sure what do you mean here...
What I'm saying is that this seems designed to allow characters to serve at the front with no risk of losing their mistresses while they are away - because the SP loss means that it's not worth it for anyone else to court them... As said, the penalty would be just for onw turn. The benefits for having a mistress each turn...
I would not say that's no risk, just reducing it, as you cannot deffend her.
|
|
|
|
Post by gaston on Sept 30, 2019 7:35:04 GMT
Well, let's just say that I don't see the need to have it 'reduced' - and in practice I think it will just result in characters looking elsewhere.
The suggestion also assumes that that the 'wronged' lover is universally well liked (thanks to the SP penalties). The reverse could well be true. He could be universally detested with all of Paris celebrating the fact that someone has rescued his former lady and she has finally escaped his clutches. What happens then? Positive SPs ?
Finally, it puts unnecessary constraints on Female PCs, making it very disadvantageous to leave their lovers if they are at front.
Sorry, but I really think we should leave this as it is.
|
|
|
|
Post by huillaume on Sept 30, 2019 8:13:17 GMT
Well, let's just say that I don't see the need to have it 'reduced' - and in practice I think it will just result in characters looking elsewhere. The suggestion also assumes that that the 'wronged' lover is universally well liked (thanks to the SP penalties). The reverse could well be true. He could be universally detested with all of Paris celebrating the fact that someone has rescued his former lady and she has finally escaped his clutches. What happens then? Positive SPs ? Finally, it puts unnecessary constraints on Female PCs, making it very disadvantageous to leave their lovers if they are at front. Sorry, but I really think we should leave this as it is.
Not necessarly has to be well loved, it's just that leaving someone when he's figting for the King and Motherland would be seen as a wrong by amny people in times of war, and traying to profit from someone being at the front would be seen as shameful too. The total amount of SPs lost could represent how much is he liked (or disliked, if low).
As for female PCs, well, I talked about courting a mistress, not just her leaving. I didn't say anything about the lady leaving on her own, if the lover is at the front for too long (though it probably would be despised by most, seeing it as punishing someone just for fulfilling his duty).
Just think what would people think about someone leaving his/her lover that is in the military while s/he is serving on the front in real life...
And again, it's only a single turn penalty
|
|
|
|
Post by gaston on Sept 30, 2019 8:22:44 GMT
Let's just say his friends are outraged, his enemies are laughing up their sleeves, and they effectively cancel each other out. Paris could be a lot less interesting otherwise.
I don't care that it's only a single turn penalty. It's a totally unnecessary penalty which shouldn't be imposed in the first place.
|
|
|
|
Post by huillaume on Sept 30, 2019 9:29:28 GMT
Let's just say his friends are outraged, his enemies are laughing up their sleeves, and they effectively cancel each other out. Paris could be a lot less interesting otherwise. I don't care that it's only a single turn penalty. It's a totally unnecessary penalty which shouldn't be imposed in the first place.
I guess those who laught would do it in private, as otherwise they'd be failing to those fulfilling their duty, while those outraged would do it publicly...
Well, we agree in that we disagree in this view. I guess it's turn to others to give their opinions...
|
|
|
|
Post by gaston on Sept 30, 2019 10:27:30 GMT
The lady would lose the same amount of SPs.
I don't think you've thought through the ramifications here. Priest characters would never be affected. Military characters would be affected once in blue moon. Female PCs (who don't get any support if their beaux are at the front) would be affected ten times more often. It severely penalises Female PCs to give a small advantage to military PCs (whose mistresses are more difficult to court already). If it happened to a member of the King's Musketeers, the Cardinal's Guard would be buying drinks all round and publicly laughing at the discomfort of him and his friends - and vice versa. I don't think it makes sense in a RP context - and it is totally iniquitous where Female PCs are concerned. |
|
|
|
Post by Ymbert Montgomery on Sept 30, 2019 12:23:21 GMT
On a metalevel, I think some competition for mistresses is good as it increases conflict.
|
|
|
|
Post by Yves Eau on Oct 1, 2019 23:46:06 GMT
On a metalevel, I think some competition for mistresses is good as it increases conflict. I agree. There is already a (potential, at least) penalty for making a move on another man's mistress - honour must be satisfied. Of course, if the rake is as skilled with his rapier as with the ladies, he may benefit from the duel, but such is life. If the offended soldier is sufficiently popular with the active population of Paris, he could always call in favours to exact revenge in other ways. If he is not, who cares what the anonymous masses think? |
|
