|
Post by gaston on Sept 18, 2019 6:29:39 GMT
Another Look at Estates The real Cardinal Richelieu put every spare livre he had into buying more land and so did the other smart money in 17th Century France. Not only Nobles, but also gentlemen, depended upon rents from their estates for their income. Louis XIV, the son of our Monarch, gave one of his mistresses 200,000 livres so that she could buy a large estate at Maintenon (becoming the Marquise de Maintenon in the process - see below). It gave her an income of 10,000 livres per year, meaning that on average landed estates provide returns of 5% per year on their value. In 17th Century France noble titles (Baron and above) were actually attached to estates - if you lost the estate you lost the title - meaning that titles could be bought and sold. (The families of rich gentlemen can be considered to have have increased their land holdings a bit at a time over generations, with none of the estates they have bought carrying a title). I don't really see a reason why estates can't be bought (by characters whose SL is at least the minimum required for the title) and sold in Liminal like houses can. It can give players useful objectives - regaining lost family estates etc. - as well as goals. In previous games there have been concerns that players might buy themselves straight into Dukedoms if estates carried titles. In practice, as I've found in Fontainebleau, a couple of players have bought Baronies to fast-track onto the Nobility ladder (and get access to Court) but it makes no sense for them buy estates giving titles higher than those they already possess when they don't get any SPs from them and the King will provide these sooner or later anyway. Naturally estates bestowed by the King should never be sold (it would be an insult to His Majesty ), but buying and selling lesser estates shouldn't be curtailed I think. (BTW, it would make more sense for the King to add further lands to a character's titled estate, and pay for extensions to existing houses, bestowing higher titles that way, rather than taking away one estate and giving them a bigger one. It also makes sense for Chevaliers who don't already have estates of their own to be given one upon being knighted - effectively they would just be getting half their future Baronial estate a little early. These small estates do not carry knighthood titles, however - these are not hereditary and have to be earned). As mentioned above, historically, the annual revenues from an estate amounted to 5% of the purchase price. Where Liminal is concerned that gives the following figures. (I've amended these slightly so that Marquisates are a little bigger than Comtal estates). Title Estate Income Residence Estate Buy Price Chevalier** d6*5 Av 210 per year House 4200 Baron d6*10 Av 420 per year Fine House 8400 Viscomte d6*20 Av 840 per year Small Mansion 16800 Comte d6*30 Av 1260 per year Large Mansion 25200 Marquis d6*35 Av 1470 per year Fine Mansion 29400 Duc d6*40 Av 1680 per year Chateau 33600 As with houses, purchasing an estate would be a weekly activity and they could be sold back to the market for 75% of cost, or sold to another character for any terms agreed. Selling estates and buying off other characters would be a pre-monthly action which took place at the same time as borrowing and lending. ** Small estates given to Chevaliers at the time they are knighted if they don't already have a small estate of their own. Buying an estate of this size does not confer a knighthood on the buyer.
|
|
|
Post by gaston on Oct 23, 2019 9:17:18 GMT
One final note: the names given to houses in the current rules aren't consistent :
HOUSES
House Fine House Small Mansion Large Mansion Chateau
HOUSES ON ESTATES
House Fine House Small Mansion Large Mansion Fine Mansion Chateau
So, what's a 'Fine Mansion'...?
By the 1630s, 'Chateau' denoted palace, rather than castle, and the only people allowed to build palaces in Paris were the Royals and Cardinal Richelieu. The highest ranking nobles had to make do with palatial mansions or 'Hôtels' in Paris - though they could have Chateaux, effectively country palaces, on their country estates. (Since the upkeep of these would be covered by the revenues from the estates it's not something we have to worry about).
In light of the above, could I suggest that 'Fine Mansions' become 'Hôtels' in Paris and 'Palatial Mansions' on country estates, so that the housing lists look like this: ?
HOUSES
House Fine House Small Mansion Large Mansion Hôtel (Palatial Mansion)
HOUSES ON ESTATES
House Fine House Small Mansion Large Mansion Palatial Mansion (Hôtel) Chateau
|
|
|
Post by gaston on Nov 14, 2019 16:54:22 GMT
The link to the old Sun King rules (in The Big Military Overhaul thread) reminded me of what I consider to be the biggest current lack in Liminal - the facility to buy and sell estates.
If houses can be freely bought and sold, why not estates ?
|
|
|
Post by Ymbert Montgomery on Nov 14, 2019 18:19:02 GMT
On a thematic level, I assume that even in 17th Century France there were more houses available than estates attached to titles!
On a game level, if this proposal was linked to having more detailed rules (like Sun King has) for provinces etc. I'd be more inclined to see it as worthwhile. At the moment, estates in Liminal are so abstracted that this feels like a pointless layer of rules for part of the game that can be summarised in a line.
Obviously, that kind of more extensive rule will be a longer thing to work on, but this doesn't feel like a priority on practical grounds. No players will be affected by the rule currently and I think we're a long way away from it having a chance of being relevant.
But at the moment, if I'm honest, it seems like we have one vocal player who's very in favour of this and the rest of the player base don't care either way. If we have other players that think this would add to their game, it would be useful if they'd actually make that known so I can actually accurately gauge levels of support for this!
|
|
|
Post by gaston on Nov 17, 2019 18:02:11 GMT
Characters buying estates is already mentioned in the Court and Rebellion sections of the existing rules - but there is currently no mechanism for this. The existing rules don't say that estates _can't_ be sold - in fact other areas of the rules say they can, see above - only that the houses attached to them can't be sold separately. I'm merely attempting to provide the fourth leg for what is currently a three-legged chair here, to re-establish some rules consistency. There were also far fewer in a position to buy estates with titles than there were buy houses too. The inescapable fact is, however, that both houses and estates were bought and sold. So what rationale could there possibly be for allowing one but continuing to not provide for the other - especially when the possibility of buying estates is already referred to in some sections of the rules? The whole point of the estate rules as proposed above is that they mesh in seamlessly with the _existing_ Nobles & Estate rules, just clarifying/rationalising a few minor points, and purposely don't impact on any other areas of the rules. They could be adopted as is without causing any ripples anywhere else in the current rules set. Expanding them to cover provincial differences, along the lines of Sun King, is simplicity itself however. The above suggestions are based upon the fact that estates in the prestigious Isle de France - specifically the Marquisate of Maintenon, 40 miles SW of Paris - provided annual revenues of 5% of its purchase price. Estates in less prestigious provinces could be cheaper to buy (thanks to land prices being lower) whilst still providing the same level of revenue. This would require characters to be given a Province of birth at character inception, however, (so that the King knows where to give them an estate along with their first title) and will mean that titled estates given to some characters will be worth less than those he gives to others. Since their revenues will be the same and they won't be able to sell these estates anyway - see initial post - this won't be much of a drawback. Titles from poorer provinces would be less highly regarded than those from richer ones, of course. [A note on the Sun King though - the prices there are light years away from reality. The Comte's Estate in Gascony costing 1000 x 6 x 2 x 5 = 60,000 Livres which is given as an example in the Purchasing Estates section of the SK rules amounts to 238 times its average annual revenue - when it should be 20 times its annual revenue (around 5000) as a maximum. Also, the method of calculating estate revenue in SK is incredibly complex: number of dice according to estate size times Province Base Revenue and then affected by Administrative Ability/Estate Manager and finally subjected to a variable tax rate...it's no wonder that the SK GM got tired of adjudicating turns In Fontainebleau I just give estates a fixed monthly revenue and have done with it.]
So, Liminal now has 8 provinces (plus Paris and the Isle de France administered by the City Governor): Burgundy, Champagne, Normandy, Picardy, Brittany, Languedoc, Provence and Gascony. Estates in these could be valued at just a percentage of the Isle de France prices above (thanks to cheaper land prices as mentioned) as follows: Burgundy 80% Champagne 80% Normandy 70% Picardy 70% Brittany 70% Languedoc 60% Provence 50% Gascony 50% At the moment, however, characters can host parties at their estates as a weekly activity. Where estates in the Isle de France are concerned this is feasible. Trecking to Toulouse on the Spanish border, partying, and then trecking back again in a single week does tend to stretch credibility somewhat. Maybe the Isle de France should be the only area where parties can be hosted at estates - unless characters are in a province for some other reason (Governors governing, when Court is held in the Province etc.) ? How are they any more abstracted than houses, which can be bought and sold? Anything characters can do with houses they can do with houses on estates (host parties etc.) The only thing we don't know how to do is buy and sell estates, despite this possibility being stated in other areas of the current rules. Well, is it not better to have a rule in place before it's needed than not have one when it is...? And shouldn't it be in place already anyway since sections of the rules already say you can buy estates ? I'd disagree on it's not being relevant immediately too as, in both a mechanical and RP sense, it would give some players something to aim for. Restoring the family fortunes for one, if we add the facility to mortgage estates along Fontainebleau lines, ie: <<< Estates can be mortgaged to the Shylocks on the Pont au Change (in Paris) as a weekly action. The estate owner receives 50% of the value of the estate and still retains title to it. He or she can still stay in the estate residence when visiting the province and entertain there etc., but all income from the estate goes to the holder of the mortgage. (It can be assumed that this is what has happened to the family estates of impoverished nobles and gentlemen, with the cash from the mortgage having been steadily frittered away). The mortgage on an estate can be redeemed at any time by repaying 60% of the estate's buy price to the Shylocks (as a premonthly action). Mortgaged estates (other than titled estates) can be sold to the market for 10% of the estate's buy price (or to other player characters for whatever sum is agreed between them). >>> (PCs don't get any further elevations in noble rank if their titled estates are mortgaged though - mortgages on these have to be redeemed before any further title is received). As mentioned, this explains where impoverished gentlemen and nobles come from. In our period the incomes of all nobles and gentlemen come from land - nobles were subject to Dérogeance, the loss of noble privileges, if they lowered themselves to engage in trade. Impoverished nobles and gentlemen still have their estates (and titles) but their estates have been mortgaged, the cash frittered away, and they are reduced to living on their pensions. Their sons may wish to restore the family fortunes for RP reasons - but don't currently have a framework in which to do this. Take Huillaume Lagarde, for example. Huillaume is the first son of the impoverished Vicomte of Bearn (in Gascony). His press implies that he seeks to restore the family fortunes. This rules addition gives him the means to do it. The family Vicomté has been mortgaged and his father is living on his pension of 15 livres, meaning that Huillaume gets no allowance. All revenues from the Vicomté (after the servants and running costs have been taken care of, thankfully ) go to the Shylocks. The Vicomté is worth 16800 x 0.5 (because it's in Gascony) livres - 8,400 livres in total. It was mortgaged some time ago for 4,400 livres (50% of its value, since frittered away) and will cost 5040 livres (60% of its value) to redeem the mortgage on it. As soon as Huillaume finds himself with 5040 livres to spare he can redeem the mortgage, restoring the family fortune and elevating his father from an Impoverished to Well-to-do Vicomte - a position he will inherit when his father dies. Until then, as first son of a Well-to-do Vicomte Huillaume would get an allowance of 55 livres per month - a 13% annual return on his investment and not to be sneezed at. (Or, if Huillaume didn't trust his father not to mortgage the estate again, he could himself remain as the mortgage holder and collect all the estate revenues - 70 livres/month on average - himself... ) It also gives characters who have garnered loot at the front, but keep missing out on title rolls, the chance to purchase a Barony and finally get to Court that way. Maybe I'm just looking farther ahead - PCs are going to need something substantial to spend their ill gotten gains on eventually. (Or maybe I'm just the only who has noticed that the rules already say we can purchase estates but don't yet give us a mechanism to do it ?) [Edited to conform to new Province rules]
|
|
|
Post by Monique Adelina De'Ath on Nov 18, 2019 10:54:59 GMT
I have been following this thread on Estates and some good points have been raised. I am tending to err upon the 'side' of Gaston in this the comments / points he has raised seem sensible and in keeping with history. Gaston details some fine points, logically concluded, and if there is to be a vote taken on this.....got to get in some practice before the UK national election (lol)…..then add me to the Gaston camp.
Jason Faz aka GS
|
|
|
Post by Adam de la Bassée on Nov 18, 2019 21:35:48 GMT
I do appreciate the concept that there is more to land ownership and while we will not be in a position to use the expanded rules for quite some time I would approve a change to a more detailed Estates ruleset.
|
|
|
Post by Ymbert Montgomery on Nov 18, 2019 22:19:12 GMT
Cool, as there's some support for it now I'll look at writing up some rules. Probably after the military overhaul is done as that's obviously a biggie.
|
|
|
Post by Ymbert Montgomery on Nov 21, 2019 15:46:58 GMT
Just a few thoughts on this now we've agreed to implement this. Another Look at Estates The real Cardinal Richelieu put every spare livre he had into buying more land and so did the other smart money in 17th Century France. Not only Nobles, but also gentlemen, depended upon rents from their estates for their income. Louis XIV, the son of our Monarch, gave one of his mistresses 200,000 livres so that she could buy a large estate at Maintenon (becoming the Marquise de Maintenon in the process - see below). It gave her an income of 10,000 livres per year, meaning that on average landed estates provide returns of 5% per year on their value. Gross income or net income? I do however think there's a case for characters that buy their titles to only go up to 2 SL below the core rule's "New SL". So for a new Baron, that would a SL of 9. Historically, I think it makes sense that titles conferred by the King would be more respected than those purchased. And this allows us to reflect that without getting into complications like the distinction between noble and titled estates. On a gameplay level, I think it's a good thing to have at least a small bonus for those who got titled on the field of battle etc. I'm going to be working on this after the military overhaul, along with the random events. What I would say is that I'm currently looking at more ways for people to spend their money AKA status symbols. So before finalising the price, I'd like to get those implemented at the same time. As well as historicity there's obviously the need to make the various options relatively balanced!
|
|
|
Post by gaston on Nov 23, 2019 11:07:29 GMT
The source doesn't differentiate but, since nobles were exempt from taxes (one of the drivers of the revolution in the following century) there probably was no difference.
I don't really see the logic in that.
"Let me introduce the Baron de Breteuil".
Did he get his title directly from the King, inherit it (a factor you overlooked) or buy it ? We've no way of knowing have we? And neither would any EG! characters meeting him. All titles and the estates that go with them would have been bestowed by _a_ King at some point. It's the title that bestows the status, not the means by which it was secured.
All titles would originally have been conferred by a King - see above.
There isn't one. The distinctions are between Bestowed Estates (probably a better description for those received directly from the current King, which cannot be sold for fear of offending him), Titled (or Noble) estates which carry a title of Baron or above, and small estates whose owners are graced with the honorific 'Sieur de' though officially carrying no title at all (but one of which is given out with a Knighthood if the recipient doesn't already have a small estate of his own).
There already is. Bought estates don't come with a pension or SP award.
I'd suggest that there was more differentiation a the 'top end' of titles, and that the last two lines of the above table were changed to
I'd also suggest that rather than throwing dice every month to determine income from estates that an average figure was used, as follows:
Estate Size Monthly Income
Chevalier 18 Baron 35 Vicomte 70 Comte 105 Marquis 155 Duc 210
The above could then be subject to the new random events (bumper harvest, crop failure etc.) instead. Well, the three biggies were land, houses and coaches (the equivalent of helicopters) - which we already have - and of these by far the most important was land. As an example, the lands/titles secured by the Duc de Sully (Finance Minister under Henry IV and inherited originally by Louis XIII ) were as follows:
Duc de Sully; Sovereign Prince of Henrichemont and Boisbelle; Marquis de Rosny; Marquis de Nogent-le-Béthune; Comte de Muret; Comte de Villebon; Viscomte de Meaux; Viscomte de Champrond; Baron de Conti; Baron de Caussade; Baron de Montricoux; Baron de Montigny; Baron de Breteuil; Baron de Francastel; Sieur de La Falaise; Sieur de Las; Sieur de Vitray; Sieur de Lalleubellouis; Lord (Sieur) of various other places.
(Getting back to the first point, which of these were bought, inherited or bestowed directly by the King do you think ?)
The point here is that land is the biggest status symbol of all. Since we already have houses and coaches too, why do we need more ?
As to how much status land might give, this would depend upon the title attached to it and how prestigious the province in which the estate is located is.
So where the eight provinces adopted (plus the Isle de France) are concerned, the status bestowed by estates could look like this
Isle de France Burgundy/ Normandy/ Languedoc Provence/ Champagne Picardy/ Gascony Brittany
Duchy 6 5 4 3 2 Marquisate 5 4 3 2 1 Comté 4 3 2 1 - Vicomté 3 2 1 - - Barony 2 1 - - - Minor Lordship 1 - - - -
That means that the cheapest status point (a small estate / Minor Lordship in the Isle de France) would cost 4,200 livres - far more than the largest possible house in Paris (which gives far more SPs).
[Edited to conform to new Province rules]
|
|
|
Post by Alain Andre Durant on Nov 25, 2019 23:46:40 GMT
I have been following, quietly, but ind that I oo,am in Gaston's camp.
|
|
|
Post by Yves Eau on Nov 29, 2019 11:15:45 GMT
I don't really see the logic in that. "Let me introduce the Baron de Breteuil". Did he get his title directly from the King, inherit it (a factor you overlooked) or buy it ? We've no way of knowing have we? And neither would any EG! characters meeting him. All titles and the estates that go with them would have been bestowed by _a_ King at some point. It's the title that bestows the status, not the means by which it was secured. All titles would originally have been conferred by a King - see above. There isn't one. The distinctions are between Bestowed Estates (probably a better description for those received directly from the current King, which cannot be sold for fear of offending him), Titled (or Noble) estates which carry a title of Baron or above, and small estates whose owners are graced with the honorific 'Sieur de' though officially carrying no title at all (but one of which is given out with a Knighthood if the recipient doesn't already have a small estate of his own). There already is. Bought estates don't come with a pension or SP award. At least some characters would be likely to know. A recently-bestowed title would likely be openly commended by movers in society, whilst gossips may well talk down a purchased title. On the other hand, I imagine soldiers were also looked down upon. "You know, he's not really of noble blood: his father made a fortune in trade, and purchased the estate of a more reputable neighbour." "But now, of course, he thinks he is our equal; the sheer nerve of the bounder!" "And what of the General over there? His soldiers slaughter a few dirty Spaniards, and now he thinks he's a Lord! Someone should put these peasants in their place. I am minded to challenge him right now; let us see how he fares man to man, without his army to fight his battles for him." Overall, I am generally in favour of features to enrich the RP side of the game without overly complicating matters. I do have concerns, though, about making it too easy for a few lucky loot rolls to open the doors to a rapid rise in SL.
|
|
|
Post by gaston on Nov 29, 2019 11:37:24 GMT
At least some characters would be likely to know. A recently-bestowed title would likely be openly commended by movers in society, whilst gossips may well talk down a purchased title. On the other hand, I imagine soldiers were also looked down upon. So, in other words, they cancel each other out... But you're fine with a few lucky character generation rolls doing exactly the same thing...? What's the diff ? Realistically, no-one is likely to have the cash to purchase anything bigger than a Barony - and will need to be SL7+ beforehand in order to do so. A jump from SL 7 to SL 11 is a jump of 4 SLs, exactly the same as a SL 6 character (with a few lucky rolls) would get if awarded a knighthood. Again, what's the difference ?
|
|
|
Post by Alain Andre Durant on Nov 29, 2019 13:16:09 GMT
At least some characters would be likely to know. A recently-bestowed title would likely be openly commended by movers in society, whilst gossips may well talk down a purchased title. On the other hand, I imagine soldiers were also looked down upon. So, in other words, they cancel each other out... But you're fine with a few lucky character generation rolls doing exactly the same thing...? What's the diff ? Realistically, no-one is likely to have the cash to purchase anything bigger than a Barony - and will need to be SL7+ beforehand in order to do so. A jump from SL 7 to SL 11 is a jump of 4 SLs, exactly the same as a SL 6 character (with a few lucky rolls) would get if awarded a knighthood. Again, what's the difference ? Realistically, it would seem that the jump in SL from a title comes from the publication of such and bestowing of such by the King, hence the fact that the jump occurs in the month of the title being bestowed. So here, I have to agree with limiting the SL jump for a cash noble versus an appointed noble. In fact, I have to question, would there be a jump at all? In time, all nobles may become blood nobles with the property being passed from generation to generation, but the titles of cash nobles could be lost if the property was lost. Is the same true of appointed nobles? Or are the title published on the King's Rolls different because they can be traced to a write with seal and signature?
|
|
|
Post by Ymbert Montgomery on Nov 29, 2019 13:53:06 GMT
In a lot of cases I think that this would be irrelevant anyway. Most characters, by the time they're looknig at this, would likely be at least at SL 10 anyway.
|
|