Crown War

[Snudge]

I have been reading over the crown war section of the rules (Pages 47-49) and I am confused. I'm hoping someone can clear it up for me. Crown War can be declared by any knight, but no mention is made of any sort of notification. There is also no mention of what sort of rules we're fighting under. Adventure, not adventure?

Basically how it reads to me says that a single person who is a knight can step onto the field and declare a crown war. Win or lose becomes irrelevant. Crown war has been declared by a knight, everyone pick your sides.
Now if we go with straight adventure rules that would mean every adventure item can be used, because unlike regular war this is not a land action and not bound by the land rules in any way. So res pots, poison should be legal. But if we don't go with adventure rules then no pouch, no prayertouch, no magic stone and that's just the start of the list of spells, we aren't even into abilities yet.

It all so vague that I just don't get how it works. Anyone able to clarify this for me?

[Lord Dubh]

Thanks for asking.

First off, you are correct. ANY Knight of the Realm may declare a Crown War. The act of declaring a Crown War is the notification to all other Knights.

Fight 1 - Open field battle. Every knight that wishes to take part in the battle takes the field with their allies. Think of it as a Chaos Battle of all the Knights of the Realm. Literally ANYTHING can happen in this fight. Alliances can be made and broken until one united team/person is left. . The team that wins will declare the Knight they support as High King. Note that it DOES NOT have to be the Knight that declared the war it just has to be a Knight that took the field.

Fight 2 - Siege Battle - This is a Two Team siege battle, Winner of Fight 1 and allies outside with the High King and allies inside. Winner take all. We called the castle in this fight Tarimstadt for RP reasons, it just made sense.

If the High King abdicates, then only Fight 1 occurs.

You are correct, the rules don't say anything about adventure rules vs normal battle rules. I would WANT adventure rules to be in effect but as President I would say that we would use whatever the rules for Invasions say, just for simplicity in eldering and consistency.

Like the ring fights this would be run by the NC.

So that is the scenario envisioned with the Crown War. If how it is written does not make that clear than suggestions for clarification are welcome.

[Sir Caetrel]

I assume the if the king wins the first battle, or another Knight who reaffirms the king, then there is no second battle?

Also, do the two battles take place on the same day, or field one day and siege at the following event?

[Snudge]

The battles take place the same day. If High king or his army wins the first fight there is no second fight.

Appreciate the clarification, it was just a little vague to me.

[Lord Dubh]

The battles take place the same day. If High king or his army wins the first fight there is no second fight.

Appreciate the clarification, it was just a little vague to me.

Correct. That much is pretty clear

[Kobalos]

Like the ring fights this would be run by the NC.

Um, wouldn't most of the NC be on the field? I would think it would be run by the Land Marshal, since we're talking about stuff in the Land Rules chapter of the rule book...

[Lord Dubh]

Like the ring fights this would be run by the NC.

Um, wouldn't most of the NC be on the field? I would think it would be run by the Land Marshal, since we're talking about stuff in the Land Rules chapter of the rule book...

It is NOT part of the Land Rules, it is not even in the same chapter in the rulebook. And being NC responsibility does not mean anything more than it is up to them to organize it, just like the Noble Tournament.

[Kobalos]

Like the ring fights this would be run by the NC.

Um, wouldn't most of the NC be on the field? I would think it would be run by the Land Marshal, since we're talking about stuff in the Land Rules chapter of the rule book...

It is NOT part of the Land Rules, it is not even in the same chapter in the rulebook. And being NC responsibility does not mean anything more than it is up to them to organize it, just like the Noble Tournament.

My bad--was thinking of the Tarimstadt rules.

[Sir Caetrel]

The Crown War idea is pretty awesome. I think that some day, when the can of worms is opened, we could even get into a state of perpetual crown war. I don't like the idea of any single Knight being able to stage one. A consortium might be better, perhaps 3 Knights etc...One guy can get pissed off and in one moment drag the whole realm into a world war. Seems a lil OP.

Here is another question. If the current King wins the Crown War, is there a statute for when another may be declared?

[Sir Gwydion]

6 mo. Page 47 of the small rulebook.

[Lord Valfryn]

One dude getting pissed off (without backing) will get crushed.
this is why the "post victory immunity" is no good.

[Amazing_Iltztafein]

A crafty, loyal person might call for a crown war when they know the king's enemies are not likely to be available... Then side with him and crush the enemies, giving him immunity for a few months.

Or, as said above, one dumbass can ruin it for everybody for a few months.

[Sir Gwydion]

Make it so if the one declaring the Crown War is assassinated in the next 20 minutes, the war is called off.

[jayjay]

how about putting the sixth months one the knight that called the war, so one guy can't keep the realm screwed up? i'd say put a two month immunity in place for the sitting king, just so that the calendar doesn't get filled up with crown wars.

[Lord Dubh]

Moderators, please move this post to Proposal Discussions.

[Kobalos]

I would like to point out that no Knight has yet declared a Crown War. This talk of one person screwing it up is purely academic.

[MOD_Quasar]

Moderators, please move this post to Proposal Discussions.

Done.

[Inox]

I would like to point out that no Knight has yet declared a Crown War. This talk of one person screwing it up is purely academic.

True, but even so, I feel comfortable making two predictions on the first Crown War:

1.) It will likely result in widespread, pernicious butthurt.

2.) It will trigger a succession of others.

[Lord Dubh]

I would like to point out that no Knight has yet declared a Crown War. This talk of one person screwing it up is purely academic.

True, but even so, I feel comfortable making two predictions on the first Crown War:

1.) It will likely result in widespread, pernicious butthurt.

2.) It will trigger a succession of others.

What do you mean by number 1??

I agree with number 2....

[Inox]

I mean that, regardless of how it goes down or what takes place, people are going to be grousing.

There is literally no way that it will proceed without complaint and the aforementioned pernicious butthurt, for several reasons.

1.) It is a new (untested) rule, which means that at least someone is going to misinterpret a thing to their disadvantage. "I didn't know that it meant X, and if I did, I wouldn't have done Y!"

2.) Related to the above, someone may do something rather unexpected, necessitating a ruling (rulings always create at least some butthurt).

3.) Undoubtedly, people will betray each other IC in various ways during said War, which will lead to allegations of acting on OOC knowledge and/or questions of "Can you even do that?" Or, you know, just general butthurt at being betrayed in an epic context.

4.) Regardless of how much notification is given, or how the process is conducted, someone is going to complain that it should have been done another way, and/or that they were not properly notified at some step. Attempts to delay the actual War to offset this will result in other allegations that someone is stalling for advantage.

...that's just off the top of my head. The greater the stakes, the greater the butthurt. Hell, just look at how few people even carry coin.

I said butthurt 5 times in this post.

[Sir Tyriel Firebrand]

^Agree with all of that post.

[Amazing_Iltztafein]

I said butthurt 5 times in this post.

If it's bothering you that much, maybe you should see a professional.

[TitusV]

I love how there is a mix of GMAT and GRE level vocabulary and the word butthurt in the same context.

[Sir Gwydion]

I love how there is a mix of GMAT and GRE level vocabulary and the word butthurt in the same context.

At least he didn't say "thou."

Welcome to Darkon.

[Snudge]

A couple ideas to define things more clearly that might be workable.
1.) Keep the six month limit on how often a crown war can be fought. You can become High King at tournaments which are twice a year. Limiting crown war to twice a year seems reasonable as well.
2.) One knight may declare a crown war if he/she has the backing of (random number) of knights. This faction may not declare another crown war for 12 months. This would prevent the same group that declares the first from simply constantly declaring one as often as they could
3.) Crown wars are fought under adventure rules. Battle Rules just limits the RP value/potential here
4.) Crown wars must be declared one event in advance to: VP as chairman of Nobles?/Magistrate as head of senate?
5.) Crown wars stay the responsibility of the nobles