Rule Proposal

[Teagan]

I have seen this idea mentioned before and I am proposing it again because, quite simply, I am bored with the dueling progression available to me.

I understand that people will urge me to take a more role play action to increase my interest, but this is honestly something I wish to see happen.

I believe people should be allowed to acquire multiple Baronial rings, and that it can be done in a way that doesn’t disrupt any other rank. Just stick to the KISS theory, right? Keep It Simple, Stupid.


Allow Barons to challenge other Barons. However, as a risk to this, the winning Baron claims BOTH rings.

Allow all rules of challenge to remain intact. The Overlord may intercede for a Loyal Baron.

When a Multi-Baron issues challenge to another Baron, they issue challenge under the name of ONE of their Baronies, so when someone wins, only one title changes hands.

When being challenged by a Warlord, Squire, or other Baron, the challenge is issued for a specific Ring.

Should a Baron with multiple rings ascend to Overlord, the dethroned Overlord has a choice of Baronies, and the rest are vacated and given out in whatever format the supervisor decides on.

I think that Barons should be allowed the same challenge restrictions as Warlords. Two challenges per cycle, or one to the Overlord.


Again, this is what I feel would interest me. I greatly enjoy the competitive aspect of the duels. However, I dislike sitting on my title without anything to do with it, other than challenge the Overlord once every three months. I do not like the idea of retiring my ring to go after another one.

[Harris]

Wholly unnecessary in my mind. I've stated this before and I'll state it again, titleholders have more tools at their disposal to use now than they ever did in the history of the sport.

Barons can run a cyclic Squire tournament. Barons have an entire district at their disposal for roleplay purposes as well as a manor. So why give people MORE tools if they're not using the ones they already have? Are we just going to keep adding rules when people get bored? Who's going to care about challenges when it's against a Baron with three rings? Oh no, he loses one... and has two more in his back pocket. Personally I wouldn't like to see anyone holding more than one title at the same time in a single sport. At best it's a novelty and not worth a permanent rules addition.

[Teagan]

Harris, I believe that you have valid points, but in my initial post I said that I was bored with the dueling progression available to me.

Some people are satisfied with role playing off of their district. Others are satisfied with running their squire tournaments.

However, neither of those has anything to do with my dueling progression. I want more to do as a Baron than sitting around for ten months and only having three challenges. I want something to do with my ring if there is an Overlord that Teagan would be loyal to, other than sit around and be loyal.

As a title holder, I want to DUEL. Not once every three months against the Overlord. Not whenever someone decides to challenge and the one out of seven chosen is actually me. Not put hours of time and effort into a storyline that people may, or may not even acknowledge.


I have seen people be ostracized for retiring their rings out of boredom and going after others, and I understand the IC reasons for that.



The suggestion I made has minimal impact on anyone other than Barons. It has no influence on Warlords. It disrupts no part of any other rank, save perhaps the Loyal vs. Renegade aspect of the Overlord title, and even then I believe it adds an even amount of political potential.

[Harris]

Dueling progression *always* hits a brick wall. When you reach the upper echelon it's inevitable. That's the entire reason for additional roleplay functions for the titled ranks. They're there to fill whatever downtime a Baron may have between challenges. The rules are going to become an overly complicated cluster of confusion if we keep adding willy nilly every single time someone is bored with an element and refuses to utilize what's sitting right in front of them.

[G]

It's a nice thought, and would be interesting except for the virtual cluster f*** that it would bring about in the rules.

But then...

What happens when you hit Overlord? Or challenge all 6 other Baronies and have no further to go?

[Teagan]

There is nothing complicated about the rules.

1. Barons can now challenge Barons.

2. Loser loses their ring. Winner wins the ring.

All other challenge rules apply as normal.


There are currently at least 8 people that are obviously interested in holding title, because they are currently holding titles. What if one of those people held all 7 Rings? That means there would be 6+ people looking to get some titles back.

I can't imagine being bored in a situation like that.

I already made a suggestion for what would happen when a Multi-Baron became Overlord.

[Teagan]

Also, a side request.

Please do not dismiss ideas brought up simply because they are ideas that change things.

It is perfectly acceptable to discuss an idea itself, and never take action on it if it would not work. However, it is quite disheartening to have your idea simply shot down without even being addressed because there is, in theory, no need for it.

[Harris]

Would all the titles be treated separately still, or would a Baron have to have everything under the same umbrella?

Could a Baron with multiple rings claim multiple alignments or would they be limited to a single alignment for all their rings? How would squires work? Could a Baron with multiple rings run a squire tournament for each ring? If the rings are being treated separately, couldn't a Baron challenge the Overlord with one ring, get tested, then essentially legally intercede for themselves with the other ring? If a Loyal Baron with two rings is banished to Renegade by the Overlord would that Baron then be able to challenge the Overlord twice, once with each ring?

The rules are complex. Adding to them will only make them more complex. It's never cut and dry simple.

[Teagan]

One Baron, one alignment, just like it is now.

One Squire per Baron, just like it is now. You want your own squire, take a ring from the Baron.

You can't intercede for yourself. That would make no sense. It's the risk you run of leaving no friends with rings.

One challenge from banishment.


These aren't exactly complicated issues. There have been rule issues in the past that come up and have to be decided on by the Supervisor, because no precedent had been set for them before. Suppose the above answers were how the rules would be perceived. What other issues do you think would come up?

[Harris]

And that doesn't strike me as fair, to have some of the rules for *individuals* and some rules for *each Barony*. How are challenges split? Would a Renegade with three rings have the ability to challenge the Overlord three times each cycle? If not... Why not? What's the purpose of having three rings if you only get the benefit of having one? Bragging rights? Would the Renegade challenge queue be extended to all the Baronies a Renegade has?

As for Squires, are you saying that a Baron with two rings could have a squire for each ring they have or just one squire overall no matter how many rings? If a Baron with multiple rings can have a squire for each, they should be afforded the same privileges when it comes to challenging as well.

The rings strike me as suddenly becoming interchangeable and lose the roleplaying elements that make them somewhat unique. It also seems like the ability to remain a Baron for an insanely long amount of time would be pretty high as well, simply hopping between Baronies when you accrue a few and drop one.

[Teagan]

I addressed the challenging limits in the original post. The same as anyone else. Two Baron challenges per cycle, or one Overlord challenge.

I said the Baron would have one squire. Not one for each ring. Ultimately, that does affect the main idea of this, and easily could be one squire per ring instead. It really makes no difference past general opinion.

Barons now being able to influence the Loyal to Renegade ratio of the council is a benefit of this. Barons being able to "collect influence" around the town as far as role play and dueling politics is another benefit. The more power over the council one duelist can attain, the more of a target they paint on themselves.

If anything, I think this could put more of an emphasis on the separate districts. This isn't fact, but I think it would be safe to say that most people who challenge for a ring challenge based on the person holding the ring. Not what ring it is. With these rules in place, if you were going to challenge a Multi-Baron, you would still have to pick what ring you were challenging for.

Also, if you haven't noticed, it is already not that difficult to remain a Baron for an extended period of time.

[Harris]

So essentially you're suggesting putting everything under one umbrella and removing any advantage a Baron might have with multiple rings. So, again, what's the point? As far as I'm concerned any Overlord that wishes to accrue Loyal Barons or dispatch Renegade Barons in order to shift the ratio and keep themselves with the mantle longer should be pulling from the Warlord talent pool to do so. That's where we should be encouraging challenges to be coming from. The Overlord has a grant they can give away each cycle to any duelist to do this. And again, roleplaying is an excellent way to gain Loyal Barons. Striking bargains, making deals under the table. That's all part of the political process. It's not strictly a dueling element. Plenty of Overlords have "bought" Loyalty in some fashion without ever raising their blade.

By applying the rules to an individual you strip away any real advantage of having multiple rings. And by applying the rules to each Barony held you make things entirely too complicated from a rules perspective. Having multiple rings seems to be a novelty to cure dueling boredom for Barons without any real substance behind it.

[G]

Also, a side request.

Please do not dismiss ideas brought up simply because they are ideas that change things.

It is perfectly acceptable to discuss an idea itself, and never take action on it if it would not work. However, it is quite disheartening to have your idea simply shot down without even being addressed because there is, in theory, no need for it.

In case you're referring to me. I'm not dismissing the idea outright. I fully encourage discussion in regards to rules. To be clear, when I made my post, I didn't shoot it down at all, I said it would be interesting, but that there would be rules issue.

While you think the Rules would be simple, trust me, no rules are as simple as you just put out. There's going to be a lot of "what if's" and "if's & Then's" that will come about when one tries to cover the bases.

My job is to consider as many eventualities as I possible can, which is why I fully encourage the discussion, so people can see things I don't.

Of course, if you're not referring to me, then the above applies as an informative post rather than a responsive one.

[Teagan]

Thank you for the informative rather than responsive post, G.


Harris, I made no attempt to hide that I am proposing this idea because I am bored. I feel this would be entertaining for me, and I would hope for others as well. Role play and the duels are supposed to be entertainment.

I have already listed some benefits of the idea. Trying to balance advantages for it would be even more complicated, and I thought you did not want complicated. Advantage of having multiple rings is another aspect that makes no difference to me.

As Overlord, I did the bargaining deal. I did it as a Baron, too. That is why Kalamere challenged.

I have not ignored those aspects of the sport at all.

As far as pulling challenges from the Warlord pool goes, if one Baron has a majority of the rings, where are the challenges going to come from other than the Warlord pool?

Another side effect to one person gaining multiple baronies, the WLT should see an increase in participation at those times due to the fact that there are simply more Warlords.

[Harris]

Rules don't need to be added when people don't take advantage of the tools the current rules already offer. This would've been an idea that had my full support back when the Baronies were just rings with numbers. They're much more than that now and have additional features people should attempt to utilize before they claim they're bored.

As I stated before, when you hit the titled ranks your dueling progression is going to take a dramatic decline and when you get high enough it's going to stop entirely. In my mind that's the entire point of the titled ranks having roleplay aspects. So you have something to fall back on when your dueling progression inevitably stalls.