Re: Of Kings and Queens [Pros and Cons, fair questions not yet seen]

[einar@cvn.net (einar)]

Poster: einar@cvn.net (einar)

Elen Prydydd writes:

At 03:45 PM 6/18/98 -0400, Bob Minowicz <minowicz@nc.na.auspex.com> wrote
>I do not like the idea of turning  TNNP into a guinea pig for the
>process though. It would be unfair to foist this method on them before
>testing it in a harmless way.

Sorry, I missed this one earlier.  There are other, established
principalities in the Known World who, if they were so minded, could try
something like this.  TNNP probably isn't a solidified enough entity to try
this yet.  A barony like Ponte Alto or Windmaster's could try it.  You need
a barony with the population to support something like this on a trial run.

Okay, I promised to come back to this:

>Work on codifying the rules for all of this.  Questions that come to
>mind:
>
>Would it be allowed for a faction to back a claimant the whole war only
>to switch their support at the last minute to a different claimant?  In
>short, who is the owner of the points once they are won?  The claimant
>or the faction?  I think this is a detail that would be important to
>work out in advance.

My opinion on this is that the owner of the points is both the claimant and
his or her supporters.  Now, I should think that this sort of system would
keep claimants pleasant towards their supporters, so hopefully the
claimants won't honk off their supporters.  Life crises being known to
occur at inopportune times and since people are fallible and at least
occasionally capable of being complete smegheads, there may need to be a
way to divvy up the points.  Perhaps dividing them equally between the rest
of the claimants would be the best way to deal with that.  If the system
lets each individual supporter decide who he or she wants to go to once
their original claimant backs out (or is told "forget it, jerk!"), then you
can wind up with really icky politics.

Stanislaw, I said from the beginning that this would be a really neat
system to implement *if* the political pitfalls could be minimized.  This
is likely to be the biggest pitfall of all.  My preference would be for the
first of the two I mentioned:  an equal divvying up of points among
remaining claimants.  

One other thought has nagged at me about this:  logistics.  Geography could
make this a nightmare.  Smaller kingdoms like Trimaris and Aethelmarck
(sp?) or principalities like Oertha could handle this as far as driving
distances, etc.  For kingdoms like the East or the Midrealm, possibly even
Atlantia, just getting to all the necessary events could become a major
pain in the backside.  If it's painful to get from Baltimore to Charleston
and vice versa now, without this sort of a system in place -- one which
would require a lot of travel just to get to all the different groups and
evvents -- this might not get much of a trial run.  Making the cycle
relatively compact will be key.  The major events that everyone with gas
money to spare goes to are Coronations, Crown Tourneys, Emerald Joust and
Twelfth Night.  If you can keep the six-month cycle down to four events
(Crown, Coronation, EJ or TN, and one other), then you can minimize the pain.

Elen Prydydd



=======================================================================
List Archives, FAQ, FTP:  http://merryrose.atlantia.sca.org/
            Submissions:  atlantia@atlantia.sca.org
        Admin. requests:  majordomo@atlantia.sca.org