|
Juvenalian.Satyr posted:i. An Elector is a Prince who rules their land By Right, recognized as sovereign though sworn by oath to the Holy Roman Emperor. Any feudal or ecclesiastic vassal of Duke rank or higher is an Elector. That last bit should read "is a Free Lord" rather than "is an Elector", shouldn't it?
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 10:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 02:31 |
|
|
Ok, fixed it again. What do you think?
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 11:36
|
|
|
##submit proposal The Dynastic Right of Conquest (draft, open to suggestions) With regards to the Emperor's freedom to create titles and grant them, I can acknowledge that, but demand a limit on it. If an elector, or anyone for that matter, extends the borders of the Empire with their blood, sweat, and tears, the Emperor cannot be allowed to simply carve a title from that new territory and distribute it as he likes. If Lower Lorraine, for example, takes over France, then the good duke should be crowned King of France, and the dukes and counts within that territory should be his vassals by right. Now, if the Emperor wants to retain the right to usurp foreign titles/create them himself, that's fine, but of that's the case they should be then duly distributed to the one who worked to get them, no delays. Of course, no Royal vassal to the Empire can be allowed to hold more than one Royal title, as this would make them independent, so a caveat to this is if a vassal carves out for the Empire a SECOND foreign kingdom, rather than keep it for himself, the vassal in question is to work with the Emperor and see the title distributed to a branch member of his family. But it MUST go to that family, the Emperor can't just crown someone else. As for penalties, an Emperor found guilty of flaunting this rule would... let's say his dynasty will be struck from consideration for the next 3 elections. Rody One Half fucked around with this message at 17:10 on Mar 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 11:39
|
|
|
Also, this isn't a proposal, but I request that we work together to make all lawbreaking punishments a strong combination of harsh and comical.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 12:00
|
|
|
This will be magnificent.  I offer my services as a trusted advisor, and will give counsel to those who seek it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 12:12
|
|
|
Lord Windy posted:Ok, fixed it again. Can you explain your reasoning for requiring a Free City to be present at the Hoftag, especially considering that they aren't entitled to vote in it?
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 12:24
|
|
|
Robhol posted:Can you explain your reasoning for requiring a Free City to be present at the Hoftag, especially considering that they aren't entitled to vote in it? So that they are represented. The whole reason for the proposal is to make sure that the Hoftag doesn't become a simple 'get one ally in a mumble room and vote to declare war without going through the diet' exploit. It should just be for actual emergencies, like a crazy duke or to raise all levies and force the dukes to help in a war.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 12:31
|
|
|
I think itight be handy to also have plain/easy to read versions alongside the legalise RP stuff. That way it'll make it easier for some people (read: myself) to parse certain things, thoughts?
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 13:03
|
|
|
Rodyle posted:##submit proposal This is just people attempting to carve out their own private Kingdoms with Imperial protection. Either its all Empire or it's nothing!
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 13:36
|
|
|
I say that the puny peoples of the empire lack in sufficient protection, this must be amended. ##Submit Proposal The Emperor's Little Peace That all title-holders of two counties or less (strictly realm size, duchies of one or two provinces are included) within the de jure borders of the empire be protected by the might and power of the emperor himself. All who make war upon their smallest neighbors and disturb this peace shall be stricken of a title equivalent to that which they attempted to take through force, as well as the title they sought to gain, if they succeeded in unlawfully taking it! NewMars fucked around with this message at 13:54 on Mar 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 13:47
|
|
|
NewMars posted:I say that the puny peoples of the empire lack in sufficient protection, this must be amended. I shall readily back our tiniest siblings, just as I am sure they'll back our rights over foreign subjects.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 14:01
|
|
|
PROPOSAL WITHDRAWN The Imperial Constitution Act I. The laws and proposals passed by the Imperial Diet of Ravenna 1066 shall be collectively referred to as the Imperial Constitution. II. The Imperial Constitution shall be considered the highest law in the Empire. Any subsequent proposal which contradicts the Constitution shall be considered invalid. The exceptions are proposals which explicitly seek to amend the Constitution, which shall be designated as Constitutional Amendments. III. Constitutional Amendments may be proposed and voted on according to the standard rules, with the following changes: i. A two-thirds majority vote is required to pass such a proposal, rather than a simple majority. ii. The Emperor may veto any Constitutional Amendment proposal which does not achieve a three-quarters majority vote to approve it. iii. A Constitutional Amendment may only be proposed at a full Imperial Diet, and not an emergency Hoftag. Robhol fucked around with this message at 23:18 on Mar 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 14:05
|
|
|
Gridlocked posted:##sumbit proposal No Elector may create a title that carries with it the weight and powers of King or equivalent without direct approval of the Imperial Crown itself if not a two thirds majority of the Imperial Diet. Doing so without approval can upset the careful balance of power within the Empire. There is nothing that inherently provides power towards a lord who simply claims his rightful title. Afterall, every lord always only receives a single vote, regardless of what titles he may hold. Furthermore, the holding of a more fitting title does not provide one more power where it does not belong anyway! If you only wish this proposal so that other lords may not project undue power among his fellows through de jure law, I shall support this if it only applies to the formation of kingdoms that have another elector present in them. It helps to use very clear language to make sure that a law is not used for purposes it is not intended for!
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 17:00
|
|
|
NewMars posted:##Submit Proposal This sort of accomplishes what I trying to accomplish, but I will still propose mine, because it is slightly different and less permanent which may appeal to some people. ##Submit Proposal Protection of Imperial Integrity The free lords have long been an integral part of the Holy Roman Empire. However, they do not enjoy the same protections from threats within the empire as they do from threats without. There are those who would exploit the militarily weak position of the free lords for their own benefit. The grant of the emperor must be upheld, therefore I propose a twenty-year moratorium on electors declaring war on free lords without the express consent of the emperor. Plainspeak: No one duke level or higher can declare war on a count for the first 20-years of game time. This prevents counts from being 'rushed' by dukes before they reasonably have a chance to form alliances and establish protections for themselves. We counts knew what we signed up for, so after 20 years this protection ends, and anyone who remains a count will have to rely on their own diplomatic skill and alliances to pull them through. Notably, this does not prevent counts from going to war with each other. This also does not prevent dukes from trying to usurp each others' counties, it just protects free lords. Dukes may also join in a defensive war against a free lord, provided they have an alliance with the defending party. Furthermore, you can bypass this rule with the consent of the emperor, if you have a really good reason for going to war with a count. As a free lord I need a sponsor for this proposal. Samolety fucked around with this message at 17:53 on Mar 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 17:01
|
|
|
Samolety posted:This sort of accomplishes what I trying to accomplish, but I will still propose mine, because it is slightly different and less permanent which may appeal to some people. The Elector for Upper Lorraine will sponsor this proposal. ##sponsor proposal A clarification - can an Elector-Duke join in defense of a free lord to prevent a count from gathering power near him? Provided he's formed an alliance with the defending count, of course. e: added in your edit to the quote, thanks Samo. Baudin fucked around with this message at 18:34 on Mar 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 17:17
|
|
|
Baudin posted:The Elector for Upper Lorraine will sponsor this proposal. You should edit in the proper syntax so that this doesn't get missed.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 17:23
|
|
|
Robhol posted:You should edit in the proper syntax so that this doesn't get missed. Thanks, the syntax is a bit weird for that - I misunderstood how that was supposed to work.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 17:25
|
|
|
Robhol posted:##submit proposal ##sponsor proposal
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 17:46
|
|
|
WilliamAnderson posted:sponsor proposal I appreciate your support, but as an Elector myself I don't think I need a sponsor.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 17:48
|
|
|
Baudin posted:##sponsor proposal Yes, and I will edit in that clarification.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 17:52
|
|
|
Samolety posted:Yes, and I will edit in that clarification. Excellent, it looks like a well thought out proposal from a quality of life and survivability point of view for the counts.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 18:04
|
|
|
Man, my son is a badass. Duel everyone, for the honor of the Wigeriches!  Anyway, Lower Lorraine currently has no proposal to make (trusting in God to approve of the righteousness of its cause), but will vote on a couple when the time comes. Which, to be clear, is not yet, right?
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 18:25
|
|
|
Baudin posted:The Elector for Upper Lorraine will sponsor this proposal. Your proper sponsoring syntax disappeared again?
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 18:29
|
|
|
Klingon w Bowl Cut posted:Man, my son is a badass. Duel everyone, for the honor of the Wigeriches! Yeah, according to the rules Satyr posted, there's a 48 hour proposals period and voting doesn't start until after that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 18:30
|
|
|
Samolety posted:Your proper sponsoring syntax disappeared again? Holy poo poo I can't edit a post to save my life. Thanks Samo.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 18:34
|
|
|
Robhol posted:That last bit should read "is a Free Lord" rather than "is an Elector", shouldn't it? It should, fixed.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 19:30
|
|
|
Robhol posted:I appreciate your support, but as an Elector myself I don't think I need a sponsor. Ah, sorry, I thought each proposal needed at least one co-sponsor. Crete instincts kicking in again.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 19:40
|
|
|
VerdantSquire posted:There is nothing that inherently provides power towards a lord who simply claims his rightful title. Afterall, every lord always only receives a single vote, regardless of what titles he may hold. Furthermore, the holding of a more fitting title does not provide one more power where it does not belong anyway! Well Moravia would be an elector if you didn't oppress it, sir. Gridlocked posted:I would like to have a proposal added to the Imperial constitution. ##sumbit proposal No Elector may create a title that carries with it the weight and powers of King or equivalent without direct approval of the Imperial Crown itself if not a two thirds majority of the Imperial Diet. Doing so without approval can upset the careful balance of power within the Empire. This should stand unaltered. Bavaria has no need of trinkets to support her majesty and desires no crown. Obliterati fucked around with this message at 22:38 on Mar 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 22:21
|
|
|
I hope that the electorate at large won't stand for such codified defeatism.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 22:27
|
|
|
Rodyle posted:I hope that the electorate at large won't stand for such codified defeatism. I prefer to think of it as pride in our esteemed body of gentlegoons.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 22:34
|
|
|
In turn, we propose the following: ##submit proposal The Imperial Council Act In the name of continuous and good government, the Emperor must: I. Strike down Section III,v of Pax Imperator. II. Select his council entirely from Electors, excepting the need for a chaplain. There are no minimum/maximum term limits, or any need of Diet approval to alter the council's composition. III. Have, at all times, a declared Regent. This Regent serves for life, and is dismissed only on death or with a two-thirds majority of the Diet. Obliterati fucked around with this message at 23:00 on Mar 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 22:38
|
|
|
Though it need not be said, the Elector for Austria concurs with his friend, the Elector from Upper Lorraine. It is right and good that he has the interests of all the powers of the Empire, both large and minor, in his heart. However, I believe that the rights of the Free Lords must be more permanently respected, therefore:NewMars posted:
## Sponsor Proposal The Duke-Elector from the Duchy of Austria supports this motion. It is the Christian duty of our Emperor, the strongest among us, to safeguard and Sheppard the weakest of his flock.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 22:46
|
|
|
Hot Dog Day #82 posted:Though it need not be said, the Elector for Austria concurs with his friend, the Elector from Upper Lorraine. It is right and good that he has the interests of all the powers of the Empire, both large and minor, in his heart. However, I believe that the rights of the Free Lords must be more permanently respected, therefore: You don't need to sponsor electors!!!! Samolety posted:This sort of accomplishes what I trying to accomplish, but I will still propose mine, because it is slightly different and less permanent which may appeal to some people. Bologna supports this proposal over the other. It allows we Free Lords more freedom in our own affairs and gives the Grand Princes more room to reconsider with the twenty year limit. The Little Peace proposal is far too restrictive!
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 22:53
|
|
|
Darth Windu posted:You don't need to sponsor electors!!!!
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 22:59
|
|
|
Hot Dog Day #82 posted:In that case I move that there should be a list of current electors given at the end of every major Deit post because, holy smokes, that is a lot of names to keep straight! https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1shHYaP-6tL1-9ImwOHWZWhEMbMAJ1rSUnNrJuRkaiY4/edit#gid=0 #2-17 are electors
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 22:59
|
|
|
##Submit Proposal Genoan Banking Act Seeing as Genoan pockets are limitless, our loans shall be limitless to the Empire too. Thus at the Diets discretion the formation of formal banking and loaning services shall be introduced for the purposes of aiding and facilitating the realms of the Empire. I) Genoa shall be authorized to offer out sums of cash to any Vassal of the Empire at his discretion and deny any applications as he see's fit. Terms of the deals will be made on a individual case basis. II) Should a Vassal of the Empire fail to fulfill the terms of his or her agreement in time, Genoa is authorized to seek out retribution and repayment. III) The Offending vassal hereby forfeits all protections of the Emperor's law; thus waving the prohibition of Genoa declaring wars on Vassals within the realm voiding Pax Urbis. ---- If we could mod a "debt repayment" CB into the game that allows me to declare war with the enforced demand of +500 gold and -500 Prestige. Surrender Demand (if I lose) of -500 Prestige. I think this is a large enough amount to warrant some penalty for people trying to fleece me. This is just a rough draft and I'm open to suggestions of improvement but I'd like to have some sort of framework to offer cash to people and this should do that in broad enough terms.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 23:19
|
|
|
After feedback, I've decided to withdraw the Imperial Constitution Act and shelve it for a Diet or two down the line, once the Constitution has been appropriately refined. Instead, I am proposing a new act: ##submit proposal Clarification of the Voting Rights of Free Lords We find that the Comitium Imperiale as written is unnecessarily vague on the specific voting rights of Free Lords, and this has proven a source of confusion and ambiguity. Therefore, section V of the Comitium Imperiale shall be appended with the following subsection: "iii. Free Lords are entitled to one vote per proposal." Robhol fucked around with this message at 23:31 on Mar 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 23:23
|
|
|
Obliterati posted:This should stand unaltered. Bavaria has no need of trinkets to support her majesty and desires no crown. Thanks for the support bro, the point is people can still have a Kingdom but the Emperor or a two thirds majority of the Diet must approve it's formation. Obliterati posted:In turn, we propose the following: Here here!
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 23:26
|
|
|
8bitlawd posted:If we could mod a "debt repayment" CB into the game that allows me to declare war with the enforced demand of +500 gold and -500 Prestige. Surrender Demand (if I lose) of -500 Prestige. I think this is a large enough amount to warrant some penalty for people trying to fleece me. I'm not great hand at modding this code. I know that CK2+ has a system for it, but I'm less certain how to transplant it without breaking the moving parts involved. I will be looking into a system though anyway because I think it'd be worth making.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 23:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 02:31 |
|
|
Juvenalian.Satyr posted:I'm not great hand at modding this code. I know that CK2+ has a system for it, but I'm less certain how to transplant it without breaking the moving parts involved. I will be looking into a system though anyway because I think it'd be worth making. Dallan Invictus is one of the modders who have been working on CK2+, he's already involved as the count of Bourgogne, so you could try asking him for help.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2015 23:34
|
|
