|
Post by Linde (x-GM) on Jul 25, 2017 17:02:09 GMT
During my time playing RoE II where I played Ilien, I remember a turn where I realm ruled holdings in the same province and as that was not addressed by Bjørn I thought that this was the rules as intended when I started this game.
Reading through my old archive I have now discovered that the realm rule I remember, was in fact not presented to Bjørn as it was in an early version DO that I updated to handle events as they unfolded on the forum. (Rebelling against your liege seems to distract you from important stuff like expanding your business)
Therefore: People have thus far been allowed to use realm rule in the same province, targeting the same holding more than once because of faulty memory on my part.
From turn 15 that will no longer be allowed, so realm rule your holdings now in turn 14 before this wrong interpretation of the rules end.
|
|
|
Post by Maelgwyn ap Cadwgan (TOG) on Jul 27, 2017 11:23:05 GMT
Ehm, Linde. Now I am very confused indeed. I was absolutely certain that the rule was already that you could not rule the same holding with the same realm action. Otherwise I would have made use of this before.
I had such an action planned at a certain moment somewhere near the start of the game and was told it was not possible. Unfortunately I cannot seem to find when or where.
|
|
|
Post by Linde (x-GM) on Jul 27, 2017 13:50:17 GMT
Moved a post from NT raising concerns about his domains special ability to a private place with NT as the answer could lead to private information being deduced.
|
|
|
Post by Linde (x-GM) on Jul 27, 2017 14:10:59 GMT
Ehm, Linde. Now I am very confused indeed. I was absolutely certain that the rule was already that you could not rule the same holding with the same realm action. Otherwise I would have made use of this before. I had such an action planned at a certain moment somewhere near the start of the game and was told it was not possible. Unfortunately I cannot seem to find when or where. Very confusing indeed. I have looked through old question threads removed by me and I can't find it there either. Perhaps off forum discussions with other players where they shared their views on the rules? Perhaps an issue where the +2 from realm rule would have pushed the actions away from take ten? (many players forgot to factor in that realm ruling with a single court action start at +2 rather than +1) Regardless, the hole hasn't been used much and is now being plugged.
|
|
|
Post by Maelgwyn ap Cadwgan (TOG) on Jul 27, 2017 15:04:15 GMT
I've amongst others gone through the Caerleon council threads and can't find it there either. It could be in one of the many many message threads but I lack the motivation to go through them I am convinced of the conversation taking place somewhere on the forum. And not the +2 reference from a realm action being inherently two actions. It is not I am much concerned with the hole in its own really, other than it puts two and two together about certain observations. It'll just have to be one of those things that'll remain a mystery.
|
|
|
Post by SouthWestern Traders on Jul 27, 2017 16:46:24 GMT
I remember that conversation, and yet I can't find it either. And I remember it being with ToG.
|
|
|
Post by Maelgwyn ap Cadwgan (TOG) on Jul 27, 2017 22:30:32 GMT
Thought as much, that's why I was looking in the Caerleon Council thread. It is the only place outside of my forum that I've ever posted preliminary DO plan. *As far as I recall.
|
|