|
Post by gaston on Nov 4, 2019 18:43:43 GMT
A Look At Embezzling
The house rules make it a lot harder for characters to amass large amounts of cash than the standard EG! Rules. The most glaring example of this is that whereas in the standard rules it is possible for the Chancellor, Governors and Army Quartermasters to embezzle up to 20,000 livres, this has been cut by 50% and the maximum possible is now only 10,000. Also, even the Chancellor is restricted to embezzling only once per season (while in many games he can embezzle once per month - no time limits are mentioned for the Chancellor in the original EG! rules).
This could be because, apart from bribes, there isn't much to spend cash on. Houses, especially at the luxury end, are relatively cheap and at the moment it's not possible to blow large amounts of cash on country estates (though hopefully this will become possible eventually).
The restricted opportunities for large scale embezzlement are offset to some extent by the almost universal opportunities to embezzle smaller amounts. Priests and Captains can embezzle 10 livres per month with very little chance of getting caught, and can embezzle up to 50 livres per month. At the other end of the scale Archbishops and Generals can embezzle 100 livres per month with very little chance of getting caught, and can embezzle up to 500 livres per month. (Actually, Archbishops can embezzle 400 livres per month with _no_ chance of getting prosecuted thanks to their rank immunity).
The wrinkle which is going to guarantee that large amounts are rarely, if ever, embezzled is a little clause which doesn't actually appear in the rules and seems to have been tagged on as an afterthought under the Minister of State section of Annex A (Notes on Appointments):
This means that those going for large amounts are likely to face prosecution or riots whilst having absolutely nothing to show for it - and it really doesn't make sense. If no cash is missing from the treasury, why should the Chancellor be prosecuted in the first place ? If no extra taxes have been raised, why should the peasants start revolting...?
I think Liminal would be improved considerably if this irksome afterthought was quietly dispensed with and the clause removed completely. Like I said, it just doesn't make any sense.
Finally, there is the question of Artists, Doctors and Female PCs. Shouldn't they have opportunities to embezzle from those they are in service to / working for too? I'd like to suggest the following
In Service to OR Med/Art Skill Level of May Embezzle As
Chevalier/euse 3 Priest / Captain Baron/ess 4 Curate / Major Vicomte/ess 5 Abbe / Lt Colonel/ess 6 Comte/sse 6 Curia / Colonel Marquis/ise 7 Canon / Brig General Duc/Duchese 8 Bishop / Lt General Prince/ess/ Cardinal 9 Archbishop / General King/Queen 10 Cardinal / Field Marshal
|
|
|
Post by Ymbert Montgomery on Nov 6, 2019 1:44:40 GMT
Agree on the afterthought. (On reflection that doesn't make sense).
Not sure on Artists/Doctors/Female PCs. Especially the first two; wouldn't that essentially be theft rather than embezzlement?
|
|
|
Post by gaston on Nov 6, 2019 8:59:13 GMT
Agree on the afterthought. (On reflection that doesn't make sense). That was the biggie, and losing it will certainly remove an enormous damper from the game. Artists/Doctors and female PCs - the suggestion was only made in the interests of consistency. What they actually do to get the extra cash (overcharging patients or for artist's materials, petty pilfering which can be blamed on the servants etc.) might not be embezzlement per se, just using the embezzlement table to save having to create another one. Whether such rules would ever be used is another question - most of the above will have a professional reputation to protect. No harm in making the option available though, I wouldn't have thought...?
|
|
|
Post by huillaume on Nov 6, 2019 15:31:07 GMT
I see some logic on losing the embelezzed funds if caught. The character may be forced to return them, or, i n the case of ggovernors, the only knowledge o fhis attempt to raise taxes may cause the unrest, even before they are collected...
Another possibility would be to make a roll to see if the funds are kept (funds hidden, taxes already paid) or not (founds caught too, revolting people refusing to pay extra taxes, or those taxes being taken by the Crown, etc).
Slightly related:
What is the effect of tax evasion (rule 30.4)?
While the effects of being caught are clear, I didn't find the effects if not caught (the extra money)...
Just curious, not that I am thinking on evade any, of course...
|
|
|
Post by gaston on Nov 6, 2019 16:33:05 GMT
There are already clear rules as to what happens if the embezzling / extra taxation doesn't go to plan: prosecution (with various penalties) or revolt.
As stated at the very beginning of this thread, the maximum amounts which can be embezzled in Liminal are already only half those in other games. Do we really want to introduce further complication to reduce it even more...?
I agree that the tax evasion issue is a bit weird - there are rules for being prosecuted for it, but no rules regarding taxes or clues as to how to actually evade them ! Maybe it was just introduced so MoJs could make life difficult for characters they didn't like ?
|
|
|
Post by Ymbert Montgomery on Nov 6, 2019 17:45:27 GMT
It's worth mentioning that there's already an effect of the amount embezelled in terms of the level of punishment.
On tax evasion, that's currently a 'dead' rule, included in preparation for future random event possibilitites.
|
|
|
Post by huillaume on Nov 6, 2019 18:51:54 GMT
There are already clear rules as to what happens if the embezzling / extra taxation doesn't go to plan: prosecution (with various penalties) or revolt. The fact the quantities are halved is, IMHO, irrelevant for my point, as, be it higher or lower, what I'm pointing is that in most cases any funds so illegaly obtained would be either returned or confiscated if the fact is discovered. You're suggesting the money for embelezzement/excessive taxes to be a sure thing , despite the consequences it hay have.
If so, imagine a governor of a province with MA 7. Why should he not so raise the taxes? He may face a revolt (as with MA 7 the result of 5-6 taht would put him in disgrace are not possible, so that may be seen even as to be in his benefit, as he will face a campaign with little risk, being the commander and high possibilities o MiDs, etc.), but he will end up rich in any case... Likewise, in some other cases, the fact the money is kept may well compensate the punishment you might face. Let's imagine a QM embelezed 10000 crowns (pobably leading to miliary disaster and many deaths). Even if caught and cour-martialed (I guess it would be for treason), only a 10+ would mean execution (as he's a General), of course influentiable and witnesses can be brought to his defense (so, I guess condemn is quite rare), but otherwise will keep his money and be ready for the next round... That's why I agree with losing the money (or at least having a chance to) if caught, as otherwise corruption would be nearly the norm. As stated at the very beginning of this thread, the maximum amounts which can be embezzled in Liminal are already only half those in other games. Do we really want to introduce further complication to reduce it even more...? I don't see a roll to see if the embelezzer keeps the money to be too much a complication, nor reducing it even more... It can be as simple as " the corrupt character keeps the money on a roll of X+". Of course, it may be more complex, as adding DMs or alowing him to keep a part of it (e.g. 2d6-2 x 10%), assuming the other part is confiscated or (s)he cuts his losses when relizes he will be caught.
|
|
|
Post by gaston on Nov 6, 2019 19:24:39 GMT
No, I'm suggesting that penalties in place are already sufficient:
QM Generals who embezzle to the point of reducing their army's effectiveness, but escape conviction, are likely to get hauled up for treason as soon there is a PC MoS and CPS in place. No-one likes to see characters needlessly killed so that a QM can line his pockets... Of course it will reduce it even more if there is an extra chance they won't get anything after all. Doh!
|
|
|
Post by Ymbert Montgomery on Nov 6, 2019 20:21:12 GMT
I take Hullaume's point on people keeping the money on a guilty verdict, but it's unlikely to come up in play. A guility verdict is probably going to kill that character.
It's also worth mentioning that a commuted sentence is still going to the frontier which is probably a death sentence anyway and at best takes people out of the game for months.
The justice rules do need tidying up a bit but "death sentence for high crimes" is consistent throughout the rules.
If this needs modifying at all (and it may do) I'd suggest it doesn't for the main appointments. The only questions really are surrounding QMs and Governors (and maybe priests).
The only thing I will say (and this is rare enough that I don't think it needs to be in the rules) is that people getting the clever idea to transfer all their money to a friend just before trial may see both parties hauled up on conspiracy trials. I think it's fair to assume the French justice system aren't complete imbeciles!
|
|
|
Post by Ymbert Montgomery on Nov 6, 2019 20:22:40 GMT
Although I think part of the issue is the term "caught".
If caught and found not guilty, people quite obviously shouldn't be punished for that. There's a stronger case for needing it to be paid back in the case of a guilty verdict, but as I mentioned you're likely to be dead and not care anyway.
|
|
|
Post by huillaume on Nov 7, 2019 11:34:10 GMT
No, I'm suggesting that penalties in place are already sufficient: Which brings me another question: I see it quite contradictory with the Justice rules... Shold a character embeleze, would this quoted part apply, or will rule 30? A related question: What are the game effects of a Gaol sentence?
|
|
|
Post by Ymbert Montgomery on Nov 7, 2019 15:04:52 GMT
Which brings me another question: I see it quite contradictory with the Justice rules... Shold a character embeleze, would this quoted part apply, or will rule 30? That is somewhat contradictory! We'll go with the big trial rules (rule 30). That also means people aren't going to hang for embezzling 50L At the moment, very little. It takes you out of the game for that time and you have a chance of illness every month. If people have ideas for something a bit more interesting I'm happy to hear them!
|
|
|
Post by gaston on Nov 7, 2019 16:03:31 GMT
We'll go with the big trial rules (rule 30). That also means people aren't going to hang for embezzling 50L So minor peculation ( as per the 'Ecclesiastic, Military Embezzlement Table' ) is handled by the Governor of Paris under rule 30, but major embezzlement (Chancellors stealing from the Treasury) is handled by the Minister of Justice. Correct ?
|
|
|
Post by Ymbert Montgomery on Nov 7, 2019 16:46:27 GMT
We'll go with the big trial rules (rule 30). That also means people aren't going to hang for embezzling 50L So minor peculation ( as per the 'Ecclesiastic, Military Embezzlement Table' ) is handled by the Governor of Paris under rule 30, but major embezzlement (Chancellors stealing for the Treadury) is handled by the Minister of Justice. Correct ? That's right. I don't think the Minister of Justice would be called in for minor amounts!
|
|
|
Post by huillaume on Nov 7, 2019 17:13:27 GMT
Alternatively you might create a new apointment for judges, charged with minor cases... e.g. Rank/title: Chevalier (Brigadier for the military one) Minimum SL: 9 Appointment: judge Num Allowed: 3 (+1 for the Military) Who appoints: MoJ (Marechal for the military one) SPs: 6 Inf: 3 Roll: 7 Pay: 25 Rank/title | Minimum SL
| Appointment | Num Allowed
| Who appoints
| SPs | Influence | Roll | Pay | Chevalier | 9 | Judge | 3 | MoJ
| 6 | 3 | 7 | 25 | Brigadier
| 9 | Military Judge
| 1 | Marechal | 6 | 3 | 7
| 25 |
Each of them is on duty for a month per season, hearing all low and minor cases judged this month. Major crimes are seen as rules say May be corrupt himself (mostly accepting bribes) as follows:
Ammount | Caught | 50 | 12+ | 250
| 10+ | 750 | 8+ | 2000
| 5+ |
If caught, they are always judged by the Minister of Justice, as a High Crime
As always, feel free to accept all, part or none of this rule, as well as to modify any/all factors (SL, title, influence, etc...) or to use as a basis form making your own
|
|