View Full Version : Family not important enough...
you are republican, are you. Giving last names to kings would be a SIN aggainst history. The only king with last name was (somewhen after 14july 1789) Luis Capet, former king of France.
Kings NEVER had this. I only think that game shuld remember if my king is Luis I. II. or III.
Cro_Knight
02-12-2004, 00:33
wat about woman marshalls like no heirs then daughter becoms monarch eg joan of arc
lurking horror
02-12-2004, 00:49
Well... Joan of Arc specifically was never a monarch. It was also very rare for woman to involve themselves in combat like that. As a rare one off for AI rebellions or a very, very rare "your daughter has taken command of an army!" event (complete with subsequent impact on kingdom relations), I could see it. But only just.
I wouldn't mind some kingdoms allowing the occasional matriarchal rule appearing though. But it would have to affect relations.
Cro_Knight
02-12-2004, 06:46
i kno she wasnt a monarch she was a leader or as in koh marshall but maybe in some circumstances a princess can become a marshall like for all those female koh fans
I can't imagine woman-marshalls! It would be foul against history. The only case of woman leading royal army (known, of course) was Joan of Arc or maybe up to 5 another in 1000 years of european middle ages.
Woman-monarchs are not so bad, but I would enable this only in pagan nations. As I said before in christian nations I know, women were "ruling" as regents only IN THE NAME OF their SONS!! I don't wanna be chauvinistic, but in medieval Europe women from royal dynasties were:
1) married as some diplomatical asset -> in KoH wives or "spies" in royal courts they are married in
2) sent into a monastery to rise piety of kingdom -> abbysses-clerics as described by me above
3) died
These are the only ways how use princesses as knight-like persons in KoH - a cleric or a spy
lurking horror
02-12-2004, 09:56
sent into a monastery to rise piety of kingdom -> abbysses-clerics as described by me above
Or by me above that. :cheers:
Seems like we're basically on the same page here. :)
you are republican, are you. Giving last names to kings would be a SIN aggainst history. The only king with last name was (somewhen after 14july 1789) Luis Capet, former king of France.
Kings NEVER had this. I only think that game shuld remember if my king is Luis I. II. or III.
Oj, i dident now that sorry :silly: (and yes i am an republican)
Oj, i dident now that sorry :silly: (and yes i am an republican)that about you-republican was a joke :)
@lurking horror
sorry. :cheers:
lurking horror
02-12-2004, 20:23
Nothing to be sorry for. We came to the same basic conclusion independently. I think that shows (at least to a degree) that it's an idea with merit. :)
that about you-republican was a joke :)
@lurking horror
sorry. :cheers:
O i cane be a litel sloooowwwwee some times (i gues i shoud go to bead earlyer than 04.00 every day :) )
Martinus
13-12-2004, 10:02
To make things simple (read: doable in a patch) I would recommend:
- Princes who are in the court (as opposed to unassigned ones) and who become brothers (and so on) of the ruling King when their father dies should get a little sceptre next to their portraits (rather than becoming plain knights - they now lose the princely crown, but get nothing) indicating they belong to cadet branches of royalty. That would only affect one thing: if the King dies without heir, the royalty knights would be first in line to the throne.
- Princesses should be appointable as "clerics" (abesses) to the court and have all the normal powers of a cleric (except for becoming the Pope, of course ;))
vBulletin v3.5.4, Copyright ©2000-2007, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.