[BIRTHRIGHT] Fortified Hold

[Memnoch]

- -----Original Message-----
From: Eric Dunn
To: birthright@MPGN.COM
Date: Friday, May 08, 1998 1:27 PM
Subject: [BIRTHRIGHT] - Re: [BIRTHRIGHT] Fortified Holdings


>Remember a week or so ago, I brought up the idea of contesting castles, and
>we all pretty much agreed that that was out of the question--
>
>Well, wouldn't you think the same rule would apply to fortified holdings?
>If it's fortified, you pretty much HAVE to come by with guns ablazing, so
>to speak, to get the influence of the "contested" regent out of there?
>
>So bascially, what I'm saying is this, or rather what's the opinion on
this:
>
>If someone has fortified their holding, it can't be contested. It must be
>attacked, or seiged, like a castle.
>
>BTW, I can't find a word about it in the rules. The word fortification
>isn't even mentioned under the "Contest" rule.
>
>E


Kariu is right on this one... I spoke with Carrie Bebris a while back and I
posed the same question (as I believed the same way... that if you fortify
the holding, that it is immune to contest... and she responded that since
the contest is a political rather than physical action (i.e. attacking with
units).. you can contest and destroy the holding politically, but the
fortification remains. Along with the garrison that is in it...

>************************************************** *************************
>>'unsubscribe birthright' as the body of the message.
>

[Eric Dunn]

>>Remember a week or so ago, I brought up the idea of contesting castles, and
>>we all pretty much agreed that that was out of the question--
>>
>>Well, wouldn't you think the same rule would apply to fortified holdings?
>>If it's fortified, you pretty much HAVE to come by with guns ablazing, so
>>to speak, to get the influence of the "contested" regent out of there?
>>
>>So bascially, what I'm saying is this, or rather what's the opinion on
>this:
>>
>>If someone has fortified their holding, it can't be contested. It must be
>>attacked, or seiged, like a castle.
>>
>>BTW, I can't find a word about it in the rules. The word fortification
>>isn't even mentioned under the "Contest" rule.
>>
>>E
>
>
>Kariu is right on this one... I spoke with Carrie Bebris a while back and I
>posed the same question (as I believed the same way... that if you fortify
>the holding, that it is immune to contest... and she responded that since
>the contest is a political rather than physical action (i.e. attacking with
>units).. you can contest and destroy the holding politically, but the
>fortification remains. Along with the garrison that is in it...
>

Yeah, but how does that work in game terms? How would the fortification
and garrison remain? What's it look like in terms of holdings?

I mean, it can't be a (0) level holding--because then a contest would wipe
it out. It also would be a (0) level castle (or whatever) which technically
doesn't exist. How can you have 0 number of stone walls?


Neat point though.. so you might have a level 4 fortification for a guild
that doesn't exist anymore....hmmmm. Bet that doesn't happen often.


If a holding is fortified--how does that look in game terms--For example,
let's take a guild--El-Hadid has this huge trading concern in Ilien. It
starts the game at level 7. Let's say he's got it fortified to level 4.
Count Aglondier now is getting fiesty, because there's rumors running
rampant that El-Hadid is smuggling arms into Ilien--So, he decides to start
contesting El-Hadid. No arms, no militia, no units. Simple province
contest vs. the level 7 guild. Well, it seems like his political sway
would certainly come to those 3 levels of unfortified holdings (say some
simple warehouses, and storefronts) and simply shut them down, boards them
up, etc. So, on the successful contest, 3 levels are then contested, and
potentially wiped out. But those other 4 levels--the ones that are
fortified--well, El-hadid has no intention of shutting those things down.
He's got armed gaurds that "spit in the face" of Count Aglondier, and
simply reject any outside law from attempting to simply "shut them down."
The good Count is going to have to bring in troops, and lay seige. Mayhap
this fortification isn't in the city of Ilien proper, but outside in the
countryside, and is a "Trader's Haven" that is run by El-Hadid--somewhat
out of the bounds of normal law.

Anyway, that was my rational for my idea of how it would work.. since a
contest doesn't work on a castle, why would it work on a fortified holding?

Obviously, it can be played either way :)

Regardless of whether you allow a fortified holding to be contested or not,
I like the playability of NOT allowing it. Makes it worth your while to
get those holdings fortified.

Just my .02 :)

E

[Ryan B. Caveney]

On Fri, 8 May 1998, Memnoch wrote:

> From: Eric Dunn
>
> >Well, wouldn't you think the same rule would apply to fortified holdings?
> >If it's fortified, you pretty much HAVE to come by with guns ablazing, so
> >to speak, to get the influence of the "contested" regent out of there?
> >E
>
>
> Kariu is right on this one... I spoke with Carrie Bebris a while back and I
> posed the same question (as I believed the same way... that if you fortify
> the holding, that it is immune to contest... and she responded that since
> the contest is a political rather than physical action (i.e. attacking with
> units).. you can contest and destroy the holding politically, but the
> fortification remains. Along with the garrison that is in it...

Yes. Why can a castle not be contested politically? Because the
building itself is the important part. Why can a fortified temple or
guild be contested politically? Because the actions of the common people
are the important part. You don't have to burn down a guild house to
steal its customers: you just have to have savvier business practices
(better advertising, quality, prices, etc.). A warehouse that doubles as
a fortress is pretty much useless when nobody buys anything from it.
Same goes for temples: holding level over province level is somewhere
described as the approximate fraction of the people who attend your
churches. Even if you spend 100 GB on building the biggest and best
cathedral in all the world, it still doesn't give you a holding if nobody
comes and prays there.

- --Ryan