> Under the house rules I don't believe CdC has to announce his intention to
> apply for a position as aide, is that not correct?
I think you'll find that applications to NPCs do have to be announced, but
that this isn't necessary in the case of applications to PCs.
> AdM misquoted alleged orders taken from an internal DG memo regarding
CAT's
> *proposed* regimental structure (in and out of character),
Sorry, AdM was never in receipt of the regimental memo (no longer being in
the regiment). All I had was an (OOC) message from Tracy(CAT), including the
the regimental structure "she had ordered".
> since it is a
> proposal how can it also be a clearly defined order?
or alternatively, since CdC didn't object to the proposal why did he screw
it up? ;-) Surely this is largely semantics since CAT's intentions were
perfectly clear?
> >I propose the following change to the command structure and request
> >comments from all of you Dragoon Guards.
> Since we are on an issue of House Rules vs Role Play in gaining rank, just
> how did AdM and CAT both manage to "leapfrog" over the Lt.Col to become CO
> of the DG? As I read the house rules there is no provision for this at
> all, it is clearly not allowed, right? So the rules were completely bent
> or ignored, and nobody objected...
Well, to paraphrase von Bismarck, "The less people know about how Colonels
or sausages are made, the better they'll sleep at night" (it involved both
AdM and CAT selling their souls to PldE :). Basically, in-character AdM
takes a very dim view of Colonels who take government positions (giving far
more status than a mere Brigade Command) and then sit permanently in the
Colonel's chair denying all hope of further promotion to those below them.
Especially pertinent to the DG for the reasons prevously given in-character.
At the same time, PldE wanted to pursue a political career but remain in the
DG. So we hit on a compromise which allowed PldE to remain as Lt.Col (not
sure how the game mechanics work here, but it's something we had to clear
with Greg beforehand) but still allow the possibility of continued promotion
for the rest of the regiment. It involves an undertaking to get promoted out
of the regiment as soon as possible - another unwritten rule of the
regiment. Actually, another reason for AdM to get involved too - he denies
himself the hubris of lording it in Paris as CO of the King's most
prestigious cavalry regiment only for some bounder to usurp the advantages
which his sacrifice has provided! ;-)
> Why is it now when the House Rules are followed correctly is it turned
into
> a huge roleplay issue surrounding a gentlemans' behaviour and questions of
> moral obligation?
See previous paragraph.
> If I am correct then neither CdC nor BDP have broken any rules or orders,
> but AdM and CAT very clearly have broken the House Rules.
>
> How can this be fair? More to the point how should it be amended?
I think it's more a case of the rules not covering _every_ eventuality and
the GM's discretion having to be called upon from time to time - as in this
case. It may also be useful to note that, had this not occurred, there
wouldn't have been any vacant majorities for CdC and BDP to leapfrog into
anyway. Aren't you throwing the baby out with the bathwater here?
> If we accept that the rules were broken somehow justifiably for AdM then
> perhaps he can argue he has a right to a roleplay motive for questioning
> BDP's actions and preventing my career advancement if possible. What of
> ungentlemanly conduct? We are playing gentlemen who debauch, insult, read
> private mail, fight over ladies, duel, visit brothels and go to war with a
> lust for blood. I'm quite sure that taking an opportunity to purchase a
> rank is sufficiently gentlemanly enough for any other regiment, so why not
> the DG?
Because, unlike in the DG, the Colonels of many other regiments don't give a
toss about the porspects of characters beneath them, with the result that
you never _get_ six characters going after a single majority and thus need
no protocols to ensure that these are handled. And btw, AdM has never
visited a brothel and, until last month, had never been intimate with a lady
whom he had not subsequently married :)
> There were never any _orders_ regarding BDP's purchase of a majority nor
> mine, regardless of there relevance under the house rules, it is really a
> question of good or bad form and that can hardly be the most dastardly
> crime ever committed by a character! BDP's only crime is to have tried
to
> defend himself within the framework of the rules and against unsound
> roleplay orders to resign his commission.
I'd disagree. If it were against the _rules_ the situation could never have
happened in the first place. In a RP context, wouldn't you say that a
captain of three months flouting regimental protocol by leapfrogging over
the heads four more senior captains (who _had_ followed regimental protocol)
to snatch the majority earmarked for a fifth, and then going onto ignore
directives from his CO regarding this would be bound to raise just such a
stink?
> The difference between the current circumstance of BDP and that of CdC in
> June are that at the time CdC got his majority he never had any official
> line of questioning from GlV, CAT (then CO), or any other officer of the
> Dragoon Guard OR even the then Inspector General of Cavalry (OvS) - that
> situation has continued for four months, ample time for AdM to have had a
> little sulk that his chum got left behind. Regardless, I feel I have
> established CdC as major and prior to AdM's new hostilities CdC has had
> four months of command in the field at this rank.
Yes, but as you point out yourself OOC, the Summer turns were over a short
timespan (with a lot of other things going on). IC, examination of BDP's
actions bringing a recent transgression of a similar nature to light again
seems eminently reasonable.
> On the basis of anything that goes to the mail list, private or otherwise
> is for public use does everybody feel they have some right to comment on
> what they may have happened to have overheard in a private letter?? Is
> General npc_OC an idiot? Can't he read to himself or does he have to read
> the words of CdC's private mail aloud so that any Lt.Gen passing his door
> can listen through the keyhole?
See above. Applications to NPCs have to be announced specifically _so_ PCs
can throw in counter-influences if they want to (which IC suggests an
'applications pending' list at army HQ or some such).
-Paul
