Hello everyone,
I don't like to get in the middle, but there is understandable cause
for wishing my opinion. Here it is as briefly as I can give it:
BDP buying the rank of Major - perfectly legitimate.
GlV, superior officers, and others who bother with the DG upset with it -
perfectly legitimate.
Use of press to browbeat BDP - perfectly legitimate (and the only real
recourse open).
Can the officers actually do more than send BDP (and his captains and
subalterns) to the front? No, not by the rules, which aren't circumvented
in an adversarial situation (see way below). The only avenue open is to
make life difficult for BDP (through press, no admittance to parties, etc.)
which is what it seems is being done. Does BDP have to listen or give a
fig? No. Does GlV have a right to roleplay anger? Absolutely, and I'd be
surprised if GlV didn't hound BDP for quite sometime.
While the Banana EnGarde is a "nicer" place than the EnGarde rules
require, this type of jockeying for position is exactly what the rules
allow for (we haven't typically seen it inter-regiment, but that is
certainly plausible as well as the more common fighting for MoS, etc.).
The fact that the superior officers can't make BDP give up the position of
Major by simply ordering it is an essential part of the game - power needs
to be as evenly spread as possible to allow for competition yet not so
evenly that the game is a stalemate.
The officers can entice BDP, badger him, try to punish him by sending
his battalion to the front (along with 2 valuable captain slots and the
chance he'll earn mentions, titles, gold, etc.) or give up altogether. BDP
can, in turn, seek assistance from his commanders' opponents, or those who
side with his right to buy the rank, etc.
This type of situation is exactly the type that leads to coalitions
being formed and internal rebellions being considered - the possibilities
are wonderful. This should be providing healthy competition and fun, not
long-winded diatribes (mine excluded of course :) While those with a
higher SL have more influence and power, those without still have a number
of recourses (some more dastardly than others), as well as influence of
their own, and maybe, will be so motivated as to be willing to work as a
pawn for another (evil grin and rubbing of hands).
Instead of degenerating into a cat-fight with numerous OOC comments,
each side should be marshalling its forces, whether for negotiating to get
the best deal they can, to halt their opponents advancement, or to nurse
plans of vengeance in the months to come.
I personally enjoy the shake-up and am very interested to see who
accomplishes what because of it, who sides with whom and helps or hinders
who, whether the DG withers as players choose other regiments that aren't
tarnished or whether DG remains full of PCs, and so on. Without such
events to be a catalyst, the game becomes too predictable. This single
event could cause ripples throughout the game for months to come, or it
could be resolved tomorrow.
I certainly won't be squashing it, but I would ask that we end the big
OOC discussions. If necessary, we can beg Bjorn to setup a different list
for discussion on the philosophy of the EnGarde game, etc. but let's keep
the main list dedicated to press.
This issue should be resolved in-game and in press - I do NOT want to
see anyone forced to an action through attacks on them as a player, etc. I
expect things to calm down as each PC considers their best option and
pursues their short and long term strategies.
Bending the rules:
Now, when the 1st Major wishes to command a regiment and the Lt. Col
doesn't want to, then since no one else can get to the Col. position, I'm
happy enough to allow the two PCs to "work out a deal." This should be a
pretty rare thing in any event and I reserve the right to impose conditions
(monetary payments, favors owed, etc.). The most important point is that
regardless of which one of them takes the Col. position and which the Lt.
Col position, a slot for a Major still opens up, both Lt. Col and Col. are
occupied as would have been the case normally, and no one else is adversely
affected. Given that criteria, I'm willing to bend the rules, and I don't
mind being questioned on it in the slightest. There was another situation
when a similar "swap" was made for different reasons and a different
regiment, but the main point was again that no other PC was adversely
affected, meaning that had the rules not been broken by me then some PC
would have been able to do something that they now couldn't do because of
my actions.
As for errors on my part, I correct them when I can either directly or
by some equivalent compensation (e.g., if someone has lost numerous duels
to problems with the code reading his duelling orders, then I will of
course be far more inclined to consider a special request from that PC.
Also, if a high level character offers to retire, then I'm certainly
willing to reward that with special considerations as a goodbye gift [don't
worry BYZ - I'm working on the military academy code]. The cardinal rules
is still that no other PC has to pay an unwilling consequence).
If the situation is too complicated to fix, then I chalk it up to the
whim of the gods and hope the player in question will bear with me.
Feel free to write me directly if you wish a more detailed
explanation, but let's get back to writing press for the game.
Greg
