PlaymoFriends
Creative => Story-Telling => Kingdoms Map => Topic started by: WarriorOfToys on March 11, 2011, 15:46:45
-
Hear ye, hear ye.
I issue a challenge to all Kingdoms of the world.
Have your scribes consult one another,
and send to Rutileo a list of all things a King or Knight should follow. (via PM)
We shall call it, the Code of the Nobles.
***
Hey everyone,
I am calling all peoples of the Kingdoms Map,
From so far south as Pavelonia, to the north of Avalon,
From the East of Krull,
to the West of Argenland.
And all in between... ;)
To submit your ideas to form a sort of code of chivalry for our world.
Some examples may be:
Cannot Kill Messengers,
Cannot invade Kingdoms without first declaring war,
Cannot blockade ports without first declaring war,
Must have a reason for going to war...
And stuff like that.
Of course your suggestions don't have to be about war.
In fact, I would prefer if most of the code was not.
So please, feel free to post about any rules you think Kings (or queens) should follow. :)
I will be adding a formal list to this thread soon. :wave:
-
Cannot Kill Messengers,
Cannot invade Kingdoms without first declaring war,
Cannot blockade ports without first declaring war,
Must have a reason for going to war...
Out of Character : Great Idea :)9
In Character ( King Iseroth)
:no: :no: :no: :no: :no: :no: :no: :no: :no:
' Kingdom of Krull in these harsh times will not sign nor obey any such treaty and will continue its old custom of messengers being held accountable for the messages they bring ( out of character note : a custom that was followed in Ancient Sparta in Greece , see movie '300'). Also the Kingdom will command its navy and army according to its Kings commands and ignore completely the above and everything . The Kingdom of Krull answers to No one !!!! :knight: :knight: :knight: :knight: :knight: :knight: :knight: :knight: :knight: :knight: :knight: :knight: :knight: :knight: :knight: :knight:
-
... messengers being held accountable for the messages they bring... a custom that was followed in Ancient Sparta in Greece , see movie '300')....
I am fairly sure that is hogwash,
as was much of the other "Historical Accuracies". ::)
And this is no treaty we ask for,
this is the law of knighthood,
and should a knight or noble of court not follow it,
He is accursed.
-
Great Idea WoT!
Unfortunately I am too busy RL to contribute at this point.
-
I am fairly sure that is hogwash,
as was much of the other "Historical Accuracies". ::)
:no: :no: :no: :no: :no:
That was a fact in Ancient Sparta and Greece !!!! ;D ;D ;D
-
Very nice idea WoT, I will respond soon. :wave:
-
Since magic or at least the appearance of magic is allowed there should be rules covering that
Magic may not be used upon another person without their consent
Using Magic in an attempt to deceive a Ruler, for purposes nefarious or not, shall be subject to the same penalties as common fraud or theft.
-
Hi Guys,
Here is just a list of some things I have thought of so far.
I will probably add to it,
and I would like if anyone has thought, opinions, or more ideas! :D
I hope you like them.
Code of Nobles
These are the rules of the noble class,
that all of royal blood should study and obey.
Battle
That in battle, you must first look your enemy in the eye before
striking him, but only if he too is of noble blood. Thus he has a
chance to defend himself. Therefore you see his face, and may respect
him as a man, not a monster of metal.
That in battle, Nobles are banned from using the sport of the bow. For
if you are to kill another man, he deserves to be defeated fairly,
though your own might, and with his to defend himself. Crossbows
especially are forbidden, and it is viewed un-right, though tolerated
for a lord to allow his subjects to use crossbows.
That in battle, nobles are forbidden to run down their enemy as they
flee. They are to use every method possible to capture or contain
their riot, but they cannot attack them from horseback. It is fair to
fight them on foot however, as you are both then on a level field, and
that is important against a man who has lost heart.
That in battle, if a man chooses to surrender, he is to be given fair
treatment. He shall be received and his weapons taken and stored, for
should he pay a ransom he is to be handed back unharmed with his
weapons and armor (if the payment for the ransom includes these).
Ransoms shall not be too large that one cannot pay it. A ransom should
be equal to the man's status and coffer size, and on the offenses he
has committed in battle. More may be added to pay for the armor, which
will be judged by it's condition, as will be his weapons.
If he does not pay ransom, or cannot, then he shall be tried as a man
of the kingdom in the court of law, and his fate shall be decided by
the ruling of the court.
A man cannot be tried for killing men in battle, for it was his own
duty to his country. Instead he must be tried as one who has or has
not followed the Code.
Peasants and common folk are to pay only the smallest ransom allowed.
If one is captured and cannot pay, then he is not to be tried, for a
peasant is not bound to the Code, and therefore cannot be tried by his
actions following it.
If a peasant is captured and cannot pay, he therefore shall work for
the man whom captured him,
Or for the lord of the man whom captured him.
That in battle, if a man is told to break the code by his lord, he is
to do so, but cannot be bound to the offense as it is his duty to
follow his lord, and therefore his lord should be the one punished.
Executions of a lord are to be done in the fashion of his choosing.
Trial by combat is acceptable, however, a lord may veto this one
choice for execution, as it is possible for his own men (who have
committed no offenses) to be killed or injured.
It is against the law of the Code to pit two condemned men against
each other for the sport of others. Such practices are considered
barbaric and the lord who conducts such sports is to be tried in
court, and if found guilty, put to death.
Court
Heralds are protected by any violence or mistreatment, even in hostile
or warring kingdoms. The law of the herald is sacred, and should this
law be broken, the lord is to be tried in court and if found guilty,
put to death.
Also, the people of the lord shall replace the dead herald with
another herald, and a number of peasants according to the stature of
the lord whom put the herald to death.
Courts are to be comprised of the peers of the man on trial. Thus if a
minor lord is on trial, only other minor lords can judge him. If there
are not enough peers of the man on trial present to form a proper
court, then a person or people of higher status may be selected to
fill in the spots necessary, but only the spots absolutely necessary,
to create a full court.
-
It's a good start WoT. I like Tim's suggestion of including Magic somehow, I am planning to have a small regiment of WarWizards joining in the Army of Belathre.
Just to make sure. It is ok to have Archer Regiments in your Army however as a noble you are not alowed to use it? Are nobles allowed to be trained in Archery for tournaments and the like?
I think the surrender and ransom clause are slightly to easy. This will only happen during WAR!! anyway and then I think these terms might be easily violated. During ceasefires between warring parties these kind of transactions can be handled, but it might not always be feasible during wartime.
-
It's a good start WoT. I like Tim's suggestion of including Magic somehow, I am planning to have a small regiment of WarWizards joining in the Army of Belathre.
I do too, I think adding magic is a great idea. Since however magic was mostly lost to Rutileo,
I might not be the person to add these requirements. However, I can think of a few.
Just to make sure. It is ok to have Archer Regiments in your Army however as a noble you are not alowed to use it? Are nobles allowed to be trained in Archery for tournaments and the like?
Correct, you can command lesser troops with archers in them, but a Nobel cannot use archery, in war.
However, as you say, he is perfectly allowed to learn it for skill in tournaments. :)
I will add that.
I think the surrender and ransom clause are slightly to easy. This will only happen during WAR!! anyway and then I think these terms might be easily violated. During ceasefires between warring parties these kind of transactions can be handled, but it might not always be feasible during wartime.
True, there would be little way of policing these actions during war,
But the idea is that the Knight would treat this as sacred and obey it to the letter without there needing to be much policing.
Rutileo has been using these basic rules for fighting for a long time, they are just officiating them now.
I like to think that this will be much the same for other Kingdoms.
What about the Surrender and Ransom rules do you find too easy?
-
I do too, I think adding magic is a great idea. Since however magic was mostly lost to Rutileo,
I might not be the person to add these requirements. However, I can think of a few.
I am working on what "Magic" means in Belathre, but as it is as of yet unclaimed, I think that is what Belathre will be famous for: It's Magic Academy.
I think during Battle we should allow all types of Magic within reason. In court the use of Magic is frowned upon to use as a method of influencing people. Tricks and such are perfectly fine. Would that work?
Are you sure some "Rutileans" didn't come to the Belathre Magic Academy? (Will think of a better name at some point)
What about the Surrender and Ransom rules do you find too easy?
I can imagine a champion that is taken with much effort (at the expense of 3 of a kingdom's finest knights) will not be handed back over lightly for just a ransom, if the threat of ar still exists (even if there is a current cease fire) Only in exchange for some of their own men maybe, but not for any amount of money. Maybe it should say that these kind of prisoners can only be exchanged for other men (of equal value) as part of a peace treaty.
Just some thoughts.
-
Looking good guys! My mind is bloked... can't think of anything good, but you have covered many ideas so well!!!! :)9
-
...
Are you sure some "Rutileans" didn't come to the Belathre Magic Academy? (Will think of a better name at some point)
Maybe one day, but for now Rutileo is just beginning to talk with other Kingdoms.
It is the first time in a long time it has been able to,
Due to wars within it's kingdom. Now there is peace, Rutileo can finally expand. :)
I can imagine a champion that is taken with much effort (at the expense of 3 of a kingdom's finest knights) will not be handed back over lightly for just a ransom, if the threat of ar still exists (even if there is a current cease fire) Only in exchange for some of their own men maybe, but not for any amount of money. Maybe it should say that these kind of prisoners can only be exchanged for other men (of equal value) as part of a peace treaty.
Just some thoughts.
That is how chivalry worked in the Medieval ages... :eh?:
And in the same scenarios.
It was just: the way things worked, their way of life.
If the other side had captured some of your sides men,
then yes there were also prisoner exchanges. :)
-
That is how chivalry worked in the Medieval ages... :eh?:
And in the same scenarios.
It was just: the way things worked, their way of life.
If the other side had captured some of your sides men,
then yes there were also prisoner exchanges. :)
Do I understand correct that you are agreeing with me. (Apparently it's miscommunication day today)
What I am proposing is that you should not just be able to pay a ransom and get your people back. It needs to be a mutual agreed upon exchange (of whatever for whatever) or as part of the peace treaty. I personally don't like the code to involve if we capture your knight, you just pay xxx and you get your knight back. That doesn't sound how it is supposed to work (I may be wrong of course)
-
I personally don't like the code to involve if we capture your knight, you just pay xxx and you get your knight back. That doesn't sound how it is supposed to work (I may be wrong of course)
I agree with Gis ....
-
Do I understand correct that you are agreeing with me. (Apparently it's miscommunication day today)
What I am proposing is that you should not just be able to pay a ransom and get your people back. It needs to be a mutual agreed upon exchange (of whatever for whatever) or as part of the peace treaty. I personally don't like the code to involve if we capture your knight, you just pay xxx and you get your knight back. That doesn't sound how it is supposed to work (I may be wrong of course)
I am and I am not. ;)
I am saying exchanges are acceptable,
but to pay a ransom is a very reasonable way of getting your men back.
The ransom is based upon the status of the knight, his armor, and weapons.
It is not a fixed amount if that is what you are thinking.
-
I am and I am not. ;)
I am saying exchanges are acceptable,
but to pay a ransom is a very reasonable way of getting your men back.
The ransom is based upon the status of the knight, his armor, and weapons.
It is not a fixed amount if that is what you are thinking.
Well it "is" a fixed amount.
Status "X" -> Amount "A"
Status "Y" -> Amount "B"
Status "Z" -> Amount "C"
I specifically said the exchange can be "whatever for whatever" maybe this country is in dire need of money and will settle for a small amount. Maybe they don't need moeny but want something else (land) entirely. Maybe it is an exchange for goods people...marriage....the options are endless. But I would not like to see this codified, but really treat it on a case by case bases between the involved parties.
If they cannot make come to terms, then maybe they are not so peacefull afterall.
-
Ok, I see what you are saying and I agree.
The parties may choose the method of payment,
Be it land, food, materials etc.
Unless that is not what you are saying, is it?
-
Ok, I see what you are saying and I agree.
The parties may choose the method of payment,
Be it land, food, materials etc.
Unless that is not what you are saying, is it?
Yup that is what I am saying.
Also to make 100% clear, it is not just the method of payment also the "amount". It might be that to free one Knight costs a lot more from a certain Kingdom then to free another somewhere else.
-
Yup that is what I am saying.
Also to make 100% clear, it is not just the method of payment also the "amount". It might be that to free one Knight costs a lot more from a certain Kingdom then to free another somewhere else.
on such incidents we cant just put strict rules for them as it all depends in negotiations etc
-
Do you think having been captured in battle reduces the knight's status regardless of the ransom practice etc? In some Native American cultures the family could buy back a prisoner from the other side but the prisoner's status would rarely recover fully. The son of a king for instance might lose his place in the line of succession due to having been captured in the past.
-
on such incidents we cant just put strict rules for them as it all depends in negotiations etc
Ok, I agree with you guys.
I will put looser rules in the ransom section. :)
Do you think having been captured in battle reduces the knight's status regardless of the ransom practice etc? In some Native American cultures the family could buy back a prisoner from the other side but the prisoner's status would rarely recover fully. The son of a king for instance might lose his place in the line of succession due to having been captured in the past.
I believe that is up to the individual kings/kingdoms to decide.
And again, certain instances might prove this true or not.
-
Are these rules more ok with you guys? :)
(I added some too.)
Code of Nobles
These are the rules of the noble class,
that all of royal blood should study and obey.
Battle
That in battle, you must first look your enemy in the eye before
striking him, but only if he too is of noble blood. Thus he has a
chance to defend himself. Therefore you see his face, and may respect
him as a man, not a monster of metal.
That in battle, Nobles are banned from using the sport of the bow. For
if you are to kill another man, he deserves to be defeated fairly,
through your own might, and with his to defend himself. Crossbows
especially are forbidden, and it is viewed un-right, though tolerated
for a lord to allow his subjects to use crossbows.
However, use of the bow in tournaments is accepted, and a Noble may study in the art for skill to use in these tournaments.
That in battle, nobles are forbidden to run down their enemy as they
flee. They are to use every method possible to capture or contain
their riot, but they cannot attack them from horseback. It is fair to
fight them on foot however, as you are both then on a level field, and
that is important against a man who has lost heart.
That in battle, if a man chooses to surrender, he is to be given fair
treatment. He shall be received and his weapons taken and stored, for
should he pay a ransom he is to be handed back unharmed with his
weapons and armor (if the payment for the ransom includes these).
Ransoms shall not be too large that one cannot pay it. A ransom should
be equal to the man's status and coffer size, and on the offenses he
has committed in battle. More may be added to pay for the armor, which
will be judged by its condition, as will be his weapons.
A ransom does not have to be limited to cash. It can encompass any kind of trade, be it land, or ore, or livestock.
If he does not pay ransom, or cannot, then he shall be tried as a man
of the kingdom in the court of law, and his fate shall be decided by
the ruling of the court.
A man cannot be tried for killing men in battle, for it was his own
duty to his country. Instead he must be tried as one who has or has
not followed the Code.
If he is found not guilty of any charges, he is to held in the castle of the one whom captured him until a ransom has been made up and can be paid.
Peasants and common folk are to pay only the smallest ransom allowed.
If one is captured and cannot pay, then he is not to be tried, for a
peasant is not bound to the Code, and therefore cannot be tried by his
actions following it.
If a peasant is captured and cannot pay, he therefore shall work for
the man whom captured him,
Or for the lord of the man whom captured him.
That in battle, if a man is told to break the code by his lord, he is
to do so, but cannot be bound to the offense as it is his duty to
follow his lord, and therefore his lord should be the one punished.
Executions of a lord are to be done in the fashion of his choosing.
Trial by combat is acceptable, however, a lord may veto this one
choice for execution, as it is possible for his own men (who have
committed no offenses) to be killed or injured.
It is against the law of the Code to pit two condemned men against
each other for the sport of others. Such practices are considered
barbaric and the lord who conducts such sports is to be tried in
court, and if found guilty, put to death.
Court
Heralds are protected by any violence or mistreatment, even in hostile
or warring kingdoms. The law of the herald is sacred, and should this
law be broken, the lord is to be tried in court and if found guilty,
put to death.
Also, the people of the lord shall replace the dead herald with
another herald, and a number of peasants according to the stature of
the lord whom put the herald to death.
Courts are to be comprised of the peers of the man on trial. Thus if a
minor lord is on trial, only other minor lords can judge him. If there
are not enough peers of the man on trial present to form a proper
court, then a person or people of higher status may be selected to
fill in the spots necessary, but only the spots absolutely necessary,
to create a full court.
Kings therefore cannot be tried, as each king is his own, and cannot be tried by his people, or other kings. But should a King break the code, he and any of his people who conspired with him to do so shall pay by being “excommunicated” by the other kingdoms.
Any and all of his titles are to be stripped, and he shall no longer be considered a knight any longer.
-
I like the Code, WarriorOfToys. :)9
Has a decision on magic been made yet?
-
I like the Code, WarriorOfToys. :)9
Has a decision on magic been made yet?
Thanks Justindo. :)
As for magic,
There is magic, so people can use it.
But I do not have any rules for it in the code yet.
-
I thought we were excluding magic from this map and keep it all more realistic for the shake of future battles etc etc :) :) :) :) :).. or am I wrong ????
-
No, Magic was specifically allowed toward the beginning. It's already been used in a number of the related photo stories and at Winterhaven.
-
Yes, magic is all good! :)
Now the extent of magic...
Well, that is up to each Kingdom to decide for themselves.
When I play, magic is fairly limited.
I prefer to use magic as the old Anglo-Saxons used it,
and other early period peoples.
If you have read Beowulf, or even the Hobbit
(Tolkien was a master at using old Anglo-Saxon references and the like)
you have an idea of what I am talking about. :)
-
Yes, magic is all good! :)
Now the extent of magic...
Well, that is up to each Kingdom to decide for themselves.
When I play, magic is fairly limited.
I prefer to use magic as the old Anglo-Saxons used it,
and other early period peoples.
If you have read Beowulf, or even the Hobbit
(Tolkien was a master at using old Anglo-Saxon references and the like)
you have an idea of what I am talking about. :)
.. good. I agree with your approach Sir WOT !!! :) :).. There will be plenty of magic in Krull after all it will be land full of wisards, witches, dragons, sea monsters, fairies and foresst ghosts etc etc !!!!!! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
And pray, tell us, should one of you Great Nobles should contravene your own laws, ¿what punishments might ensue?
I ask, because I, for one, kill messengers. Slowly.
-
And pray, tell us, should one of you Great Nobles should contravene your own laws, ¿what punishments might ensue?
I ask, because I, for one, kill messengers. Slowly.
It would depend on your crime, and what the court agrees to. :hmm:
-
Sorry to stick my oar in here, :-[ but I have a quick suggestion. It might make it easier if you always used italics when speaking in character, and normal print when out of character. That way it might be easier to keep it straight.
:wow:
-
And I am still waiting for anyone else to work out some rules if they want to add them. ;)