Game 10

Stuart Bailey wrote:

Jason2 wrote:

You've got ships, you could always run a ferry company?

Was thinking more along lines of bespoke Fishery Protection service for the King of Denmark.

Mind you the Corsairs may be in business for a while since the King of France and the Holy Roman Emperor still have to agree what "reasonable" means and then a clerk has to send orders saying letter of Marque are ending with effect from ????

And as we all know terrible things happen to treaties and paper work in G10. Take the last will of Carlos II for instance, it went missing for three years and now its got to be checked by Imperial Lawyers in Rome. For all we know someone could have forgot to sign or put correct seal on it.

However, since my orders will be sent by top French clerks I am sure they will be perfect unless they get torched by a Hussar or eat by a sea monster.

In G7 the Treaty of Scotland expires in 10 months; arguments over the interpretation of its terms have been going on for 26 months. This suggests that agreeing what is 'reasonable' is merely the first stage, signing is the second stage, then the disputes over it are the third stage, lasting (probably) until the resumption of war (the fourth stage).

I'm sure Scottish lawyers will be quick off the mark to offer advice to each side, but if the Corsair defence is to claim any treaty has been eaten by Nessie, perhaps even Scottish lawyers will refuse to entertain such a delusional client. After all there is one problem the Corsairs may have overlooked: Letters of Marque are issued during war to protect privateers, but in G10 France doesn't declare war, just attacks. Without a declaration of war, there can be no legal protection for those operating with Letters of Marque for the duration of that war. I am really curious how France can rescind a Letter of Marque that has not been lawfully issued?

Hi All,

Looks like a good turn, with plenty in the mix.

I confess, I am yet to open my turn properly.

COVID-19 has been having a few ramifications at work & in country. All good, but I may be a little tardy in replies & engagement for a while. Will pick up, once everything stabilises to the new normal. I know I owe a few replies to people!

Will try & post a photo of the real ‘Masquerade of Our Time’, when I get the chance. & I think we were cheated with second prize in the best dressed competition...

No Worries,

Kerensky

Papa Clement wrote:

Stuart Bailey wrote:

Jason2 wrote:

You've got ships, you could always run a ferry company?

Was thinking more along lines of bespoke Fishery Protection service for the King of Denmark.

Mind you the Corsairs may be in business for a while since the King of France and the Holy Roman Emperor still have to agree what "reasonable" means and then a clerk has to send orders saying letter of Marque are ending with effect from ????

And as we all know terrible things happen to treaties and paper work in G10.  Take the last will of Carlos II for instance, it went missing for three years and now its got to be checked by Imperial Lawyers in Rome.  For all we know someone could have forgot to sign or put correct seal on it.  

However, since my orders will be sent by top French clerks I am sure they will be perfect unless they get torched by a Hussar or eat by a sea monster.  

Must point out. King Carlos II Will has not got to be checked By anyone. Imperial lawyers, Pope, nobody. Just as any dead Kings will does not need checking . It is upto the authorities in that Particular country to check and verify. Nobody else.

jamesbond007 wrote:
Must point out. King Carlos II Will has not got to be checked By anyone. Imperial lawyers, Pope, nobody. Just as any dead Kings will does not need checking . It is upto the authorities in that Particular country to check and verify. Nobody else.

Good luck with that.

Deacon wrote:

jamesbond007 wrote:
Must point out. King Carlos II Will has not got to be checked By anyone. Imperial lawyers, Pope, nobody. Just as any dead Kings will does not need checking . It is upto the authorities in that Particular country to check and verify. Nobody else.

Good luck with that.

Well if the will of Carlos II only needs to be checked by the particular countries it applies too that means four seperate countries - Kingdom of Spain, Kingdom of Naples, Duchy of Milan and Duchy of Flanders have to check it. Five if you accept that Kingdom of Sicily is seperate from Aragon or even more if the Cortez of Aragon, Cartile, Leon etc all demand a say.

But actually getting lost in Spanish Civil Service documents for three years is not the worst which has happened to important documents in G10 - just look at what some people have done to the constitution of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and the Pacta Coventa. As a keen respector of doing it by the book and the correct paper work the Corsairs are truely shocked at the brutal mistreatment of this poor constitution.

Reading Papa Clemente four stages to unemployed Corsairs (sorry I mean peace treaty) think the first big big row in stage two is going to be when treaty demands return of Charles von Hapsburg and the Duc of Savoy now Viceroy of Milan for King Rodrigo of Spain hands over the body.

I would expect all those who have legitimate claims impacted by the will would want to review it. There is a reason that there is customarily a reading of the will before all parties so that people impacted can understand it, and that's the first step to them contesting it if they believe it in error in some way.

I too don't find it surprising that the will has taken a while to surface. It takes a while to raise a competent forger, so the will necessarily took some time to, um, find...

Deacon wrote:I would expect all those who have legitimate claims impacted by the will would want to review it. There is a reason that there is customarily a reading of the will before all parties so that people impacted can understand it, and that's the first step to them contesting it if they believe it in error in some way.

I too don't find it surprising that the will has taken a while to surface. It takes a while to raise a competent forger, so the will necessarily took some time to, um, find...

 
When the last French and Austrian Kings died. Who was present at the will reading. Who scrutinised their wills.? Nobody. What is good for one is good for another. But I believe the will and testament will be on show for interested parties to visit Spain and see it.

jamesbond007 wrote:

Deacon wrote:I would expect all those who have legitimate claims impacted by the will would want to review it. There is a reason that there is customarily a reading of the will before all parties so that people impacted can understand it, and that's the first step to them contesting it if they believe it in error in some way.

I too don't find it surprising that the will has taken a while to surface. It takes a while to raise a competent forger, so the will necessarily took some time to, um, find...

 
When the last French and Austrian Kings died. Who was present at the will reading. Who scrutinised their wills.? Nobody. What is good for one is good for another. But I believe the will and testament will be on show for interested parties to visit Spain and see it.

Without wishing to intervene in such a hot topic that will no doubt shape the next few months of events within the game ...

When King Louis XIII of France died in 1643 there was no doubt that Louis XIV was his son and Philippe his brother. Despite this, the regent (Queen Dowager Anne) had Louis XIII's will annulled by Act of the French Parliament. This is surely very thorough scrutiny and (in this case) rejection of the will. This allowed her to get rid of various ministers of dubious loyalty which may have been a sound move given that Paris was soon in revolt for various reasons, including protests at the long-running 30 Years War. Anne successfully negotiated an end to the war only to find that Paris again erupted in the riots of the Fronde (which was actually in 2 stages running roughly 1649-1653). Of course if you believe Voltaire's rumour that a son was born before Louis (later developed into the story of the Man in the Iron Mask), then by all means 'discover' him. Louis XIII was very methodical and ensured his affairs were in order long before his death; the contents of the will were well known to the court and accepted by them before he died. Scrutiny of the will could therefore be said to have been very thorough, but even that was not enough to prevent civil disturbance for the next decade.

When Emperor Ferdinand III died (1658) things were much more straight forward. Emperor Leopold (as acknowledged heir) was elected King of Hungary in 1655, 3 years before Ferdinand's death. He was further elected King of Bohemia and King of Croatia in 1657. Then Emperor in 1658 - no need for a will there or scrutiny, and the whole process ran very smoothly. Of course France objected to this, seeking a Bavarian Emperor instead, but France was outvoted.

Each nation has its own processes, but in both cases heirs were not seriously doubted. Arguments were more over the choice of regents or ministers within the new government than the hereditary right of the King. In both cases the Church confirmed these appointments - the Pope crowning Emperor Leopold, and Cardinal Mazarin (on behalf of the Pope) crowning King Louis. In both cases this led to a renewed Catholic faith in these lands and increased loyalty to the Papacy. In both cases the view of the church was sought, respected and ultimately upheld.

So I do agree that "what is good for one is good for another", although I doubt that is the point JamesBond007 was seeking to make.

I think part of my tongue-in-cheek point is that when lands and titles pass they often have specific rules associated with their passing that wills cannot overrule. Few kingdoms offer a king unlimited freedom in naming an heir. Most cases who gets to be heir is pretty much defined.

So a king could decide his mistress is an awesome lady who would make a dandy queen and write his will to make her heir to his throne. In pretty much all cases, that will would be tossed in the dumpster and next in line to the throne would step up.

So, while I do get JamesBond007's point, the reality is that there are multiple people who have legitimate claims upon the throne of Spain and the Spanish Empire's holdings. Saying that there is a will that decides it all doesn't, in fact, necessarily decide it all.

That doesn't mean that everybody has a right to contest the will.

I think the key thing for a spanish player is to win the backing of the cortez's for whatever is going to happen. Then they have to figure out how to buy off or beat back Austria and France.

Deacon wrote:
I think part of my tongue-in-cheek point is that when lands and titles pass they often have specific rules associated with their passing that wills cannot overrule. Few kingdoms offer a king unlimited freedom in naming an heir. Most cases who gets to be heir is pretty much defined.

So a king could decide his mistress is an awesome lady who would make a dandy queen and write his will to make her heir to his throne. In pretty much all cases, that will would be tossed in the dumpster and next in line to the throne would step up.

I don't think the point was 'tongue-in-cheek' at all - if you look across nearly all countries that have a hereditary monarchy, that form was accepted by the people (nobles) of that country because it tended to provide a natural heir. It didn't matter if the monarch was a good ruler or an idiot - there were often weak rulers followed by strong ones and vice versa. But it did mean that when one died, a significant proportion of the nobles (prospective challengers) would support his heir. Consequently there was a disincentive to challenge that heir. The 'will' then becomes irrelevant.

Of course that doesn't stop challenges, but once you break that hereditary link (or where the succession is between 2 rivals with hereditary claims) then it gets complicated. Nobles are then forced to take sides and tend to lose by it. The more important the noble, the more they have to lose.

I think these are the reasons why hereditary monarchy lasted for so long - in most cases it avoided conflict; nobles could compete between themselves to be ministers (serving the King), but the crown was something out of reach unless they married into the Royal family.

Deacon wrote:I think the key thing for a spanish player is to win the backing of the cortez's for whatever is going to happen. Then they have to figure out how to buy off or beat back Austria and France.

If there is a legitimate will and testament. Then France and Austria don’t need buying off. What about the papacy. In some games of lgdr the papacy somehow think they need compensating. That does not sound very neutral to me.

Because France and Austria have claims that they could choose to press in spite of a will, see previous comments about wills.They have large armies (and in france's case navies) to back up said claims. Waving a piece of paper at them isn't going to hold back their armies if they choose to contest the will.

The Papacy has a sort of fake claim to naples, but doesn't really have a role here. They can certainly assert one, and might, but that doesn't mean they need to be indulged.

But you may not want to add the papacy to the list of people that don't like you.

Anyone else remember the days when we used to give a bit of slack to a player when they first took on a position (esp if it was a position that was in a bit of a mess) to let them find their way and understand what they had taken on, you know when we didn't try and nick their territory and recruits, not boss them around and imply threats if they don't instantly toe the line.

I miss those days. Any chance we can go back to them please?

Kerensky wrote:Hi All,

Looks like a good turn, with plenty in the mix.

I confess, I am yet to open my turn properly.

COVID-19 has been having a few ramifications at work & in country. All good, but I may be a little tardy in replies & engagement for a while. Will pick up, once everything stabilises to the new normal. I know I owe a few replies to people!

Will try & post a photo of the real ‘Masquerade of Our Time’, when I get the chance. & I think we were cheated with second prize in the best dressed competition...

No Worries,

Kerensky

Thanks for the update Hope things settle down where you are

Jason2 wrote:Anyone else remember the days when we used to give a bit of slack to a player when they first took on a position (esp if it was a position that was in a bit of a mess) to let them find their way and understand what they had taken on, you know when we didn't try and nick their territory and recruits, not boss them around and imply threats if they don't instantly toe the line.

I miss those days. Any chance we can go back to them please?

If you had actually read the newspaper carefully, Jason2, you would appreciate that the Papacy has bent over backwards to accommodate the position the new Spanish government has attempted to create by formulating a compromise. Whether that has been reciprocated is in doubt due to events not yet published and which consequently I am unable to comment upon here.

However, "giving a bit of slack to a player" has never extended to every other player acquiescing to all their demands when those demands would involve the dissolution of long standing alliances and the resetting of the history of the game to 1700.

Perhaps your view might change if the new player was a Jacobite who decided to invade Scotland? Would you sit back for 6 months and watch him take the Highlands then seek to negotiate half of your position away when he refused? Some aims players adopt are incompatible with others. In principle there is nothing wrong with this - it is what makes the game. I am sure we can both fully understand why a particular player joining to play a country in crisis will have a tough time of it.

No new player would join in complete ignorance of what he is up against and would normally avoid acting with total disregard of those who offered friendship.

Precisely how long do you propose "giving a bit of slack to a player" ... roughly 6 months of it so far has not yielded results?

I have a different take on the last few months than you Papa, I have made my statement.

A statement made without the benefit of considering or attempting to understand the view of those who disagree, unless of course you have written to me and the letter has been lost?

Please Papa, stop trying to have an argument. I expressed a concern at attitudes being displayed towards a player.

That is all I will be posting for the forseeable future.

Jason2, you posted criticism which I took to be an objection to events in the game aimed squarely at me. You then objected when I replied in a neutral manner pointing out your lack of diplomatic correspondence and appreciation of the events you were commenting on. You know me well enough by now to appreciate that I will reply to defend myself against false charges so must have expected me to do just that. I will miss your more informed posts, but of course respect your decision to refrain from posting comments that do not meet this standard.

Feel that as a small community of players, (I would guess we number less than 30 active players) Every player in a game benefits & adds to the atmosphere & enjoy ability of that particular game. The more th e merrier so to speak.

That fellow players undertake actions that I don't agree with or particularly like is a part of the overall game play that I have to accept & adapt to in game.

Not going to agree or disagree with other player actions. The occasional "Flipping heck!" will no doubt be heard as I read through the turn, but others have also paid their money & made their choices. We can all be "Sons of Mothers" at times & do things that will disrupt, infuriate & annoy our fellow player. That is a strength of the whole system & we are judged on how we react to those circumstances.

Whether people decide to give new players a bit of slack or a helping hand lies at on a personal level . It is as always a double edged sword, said player may well become a friend & ally in game or could turn into your Arch- enemy & Nemesis.

That we all enjoy the game, its intrigues, frustrations , annoying bits, occasional success & joy is the main goal of all players ( I hope at least)

My view is that if I take over a position mid game and my new position is in a conflict situation to make it fair on all concerned what is required is equality of information.

Basically, I want to be given the information my character would be aware off so I can then make a reasonable judgement about what to do next. Which might be a humble apology for the sins of the prior Administration or sending someone envoy back with their Turban nailed to their head.

I do not expect another player to suddenly do a 180 degree turn just because I am a new player. Though it has to be admitted that in my first game (G2 - Rumelia) the Ottoman Sultan did end his invasion and accept my grovelling apology for the 10,000 men he had just lost in the ditch in Athens after I blamed it all on the lies of the letter stealing Venetians, gave him hostages and my Character's daughter as a wife and swore my total loyalty to the Porte. Though it could be argued that he might have accepted the same offer from a NPC.

But while it was a shock to find out on my first turn that I was a "rebel" and a "traitor" I would have been happy to roll play that position and did not automatically expect a full Royal Pardon for my characters past sins just because I was new. But I did want an explanation about what had gone on before I joined.

Think in G10 it would just look daft if the current Holy Roman Emperor and the Pope were to suddenly give the Duke of Savoy a warm welcome just because a new player takes over the position.

If I was a new player taking over Savoy (would Richard give a nice loyal customer a position were of turn one you are excommunicated, under the Imperial Ban and have who????? I the cells! ) I think I would just want a fair explanation of what had gone before and some options probably:

- Give me my son and my Duchy or die.........love Leopold.
- Follow orders of Papal Court as per above & say 10,000 hail Mary's if you want to be allowed back into the Church......the Pope.
- Annouce the sad death of Charles von Hapsburg six months ago due to plague he caught in Rome, your total loyalty to King ? of Spain as his Viceroy of Milan and offer Turin as a venue for a General Council of Church to select a new Pope.

With current position I would feel the Emperor and the Pope have ever right to try to swash me flat new player or no and that its now up to me to do some very nifty diplomacy or fight like hell if I want to get out of this situation.

Rather bizarre that the Papacy, Corsairs and Calvinist UDP are broadly in agreement.

Although I have to add that 10,000 Hail Mary's is an unlikely penance since it takes about 15 seconds to say the Hail Mary, so around 42 hours to say 10,000 of them. It would indeed take superhuman powers to stay awake for such a period, let alone concentrate to make the prayer acceptable. Penance is the last stage of reconciliation with God through the church. The first is sincere and contrite repentance; then restitution to those affected by the sin (where possible); then finally penance. The first step is the hardest as it usually requires a change in behaviour. Sin is a bit like addiction: far better to avoid it in the first place than to try and break bad habits, even with the help of the Church.

Papa Clement wrote:Rather bizarre that the Papacy, Corsairs and Calvinist UDP are broadly in agreement.

Although I have to add that 10,000 Hail Mary's is an unlikely penance since it takes about 15 seconds to say the Hail Mary, so around 42 hours to say 10,000 of them.  It would indeed take superhuman powers to stay awake for such a period, let alone concentrate to make the prayer acceptable. Penance is the last stage of reconciliation with God through the church.  The first is sincere and contrite repentance; then restitution to those affected by the sin (where possible); then finally penance.  The first step is the hardest as it usually requires a change in behaviour.   Sin is a bit like addiction: far better to avoid it in the first place than to try and break bad habits, even with the help of the Church.

Ok we have a plan to solve the Duke of Savoy religious problems:

- General Council = New Pope (That nice Bishop of Paris?)

- New Pope allows Duke back into communion after he says 1,000 Hail Mary's for 5 following Sundays & makes donation to the poor box.

Now the collective wisdom of the forum needs to come up with possible solution's for how the Duke of Savoy is to deal with a very annoyed Holy Roman Emperor........not sure giving body of son number two back with comment "well he was only a spare" is going to work that well.

Curiously a new Pope doesn't necessarily change the church's position - where his death occurs at an inopportune moment they usually they elect someone who will defend the existing position more vigorously and is even less inclined to compromise.

I do find it strange that if the Pope concentrates on being a religious leader then everything he does is condemned as political; if he concentrates on being the secular head of the Papal States then everything he does is condemned as religious! Perhaps there is a similar parallel with the corsairs - if they concentrate on trade they are condemned as finding outlets for goods obtained through piracy; if they concentrate on piracy they are condemned for disrupting trade. You see Stuart we have far more in common than you ever imagined!

It is down to the Duke of Savoy to solve his 'religious problems', though murdering King Karl is certainly not going to make them any easier.

If Karl dies / is already gone to meet his maker, is it actually Murder, or more a case of suicide,

After all walking alone into Enemy held territory & saying "Hello I am the son of the man who is trying to kill you all---!" Is probably suicidal behaviour in most cases.

Or Maybe the Apollo People have already rescued him as they claim, I guess they will probably claim credit for kidnapping the Polish minister this month, & helping the Jacobite Prince escape the Bastille .