Fief -- a manor-mangement sim


#63

I am addicted to this game but I wish we hand clearer goals. But like rustic nature of us being lowest kind of land owning nobility.


#64

But honestly James I’m like ready to throw money at you to get this baby to made. Also out of curiosity how much would gender affect the gameplay? Will the different genders have different avenues and engines of power? Is the game inspired by Norman England?


#65

Ok. The numbers–at least for the first year–are looking a lot better.

I need to add “calamities” and the opportunity to add expenses in order to soak up the extra cash from the subsequent years, I guess.

I also had a look at the population mechanics, and did a few tweaks. There’s still a lot of children that die (child mortality rate in the Middle Ages was huge!) and that’s partly affected by the fact that you kind of start with too high of a proportion of children relative to the total population. But after a few years that should even out. (At least it did according to my Excel spreadsheet.) And, there should not be that declining villein population problem anymore.

As for the title Laird, reading Wikipedia there seems to be two types, “bonnet lairds” and lairds. The bonnet lairds are yeomen, sure. The regular lairds are non-hereditary, non-noble large landholders who can sit in parliament. So, on two of those counts this doesn’t compare. A thornet is a (mostly) hereditary member of the gentry who would not be invited to parliament.


#66

So my good sir how can I get that invite? I mean literally we are socially supposed to be that knight for X amount of land. Also once we get knighted can we Pull a William Marshall and work career in the tournament circuit? What plans do you have to upgrade our Manor? Take it we need permission from our liege lord? Can we possibly cultivate or hamlet until full-fledged town? Also can we have children and play as them? Also can we not pursue knighthood until we get our fathers sword back? I can understand the insult of losing it considering it’s most likely the symbol of his office.


#67

Well, there isn’t a parliament, so there won’t be any invitations to a seat.

My goal is to keep this “grim,” in the sense that there won’t be a huge rise in your station or grand campaigns. It’ll be about making sure your people are fed, the comfort of a few simple luxuries, and mostly hoping that you’re prepared to withstand the next misfortune.

Maybe, if you’re lucky, you can marry a thorne of the opposite gender, and your child can rise to a higher station. If that that gives you an idea of scope.


#68

Oh my God I am excited that you’re making this!! Of Hamurabi!!! I used to play this all the time when I was a kid! You’re pretty much making a more realistic world feudal Sim. Also I really like the fact to that this isn’t some Grand thing! You’re not even a baron not even a knight you’re hardly Noble but you have duties, office and a responsibility both your Lord and your people. I love it this remind same when I play Crusader Kings and you see how many knights you have in your levy we are one of those knight that how low we are on the feudal totem pole we are.

Also so far I like the religious Dimension and the forms of both personal piety with the pilgrimage option and obviously some way of being a patron to the Church.
In many ways I feel like your game is this one more intimate spiritual successor.


#69

So no same-sex marriage or adopting your heir(s), eh? Aww…


#70

Even in ancient civilizations were homosexuality wasn’t shun Bloodline was very important it always matters your father was or uncle on your mother side . My friend you do you have siblings so you can marry them off. :blush:

Reminds me a conversation I had with my anthropology professor. Why did marriage become a thing particularly hetrosexual marriage. It was pretty much for whatever was way for the privilege class to stay in power produced heirs and hold onto land. I feel like our poor protagonists regardless of Their sexuality is going to have pressure to marry it it comes with social class with your head of household even if it is the Lowest of nobility.


#72

there’s three big focus is I have the notice in the game both narrative and mechanical. Family and their honor matters and death is close. The mechanic encourages you to honor your family have a big family and maintain the responsibility of your office. And death is close by both of the narrative your responsibilities as a warrior to your liege lord. And from your yearly job of managing your estate see how many people die a every year and how many children don’t make it to childhood let alone adulthood. I don’t know how much your characters in position to have the luxury of not prodoucing a blood Heir.


#75

I just wanted to chime in and say that I feel the economy is much improved from a game balance level. Living in the lap of luxury I have to be very careful with expanding my holdings though it is doable. I’ll have to try the middling lifestyles to see where it breaks even if you always expand as much as you can.


#76

It depends on the civilisation. The Romans quite famously adopted heirs to ensure that the “family line” didn’t die out. IIRC, something like that also happened in feudal Japan and continues to this day in some forms.

Personally, I think that the way the stats screen is set up is a bit too granular for my taste. There’s too many different numbers to take care of unless you’re expecting the player to either focus on a few specific numbers (specialising in a certain crop, for example) or fixate on those numbers almost to the exclusion of any kind of involved story. It works for a management sim, but tacking on worldbuilding, higher-level politics, interactions with highborn peers and events in the wider scope of the setting might be a challenge.

That being said, I am following along, and I am totally cribbing notes for when I have to work on the estate management systems for Lords of Infinity next year.


#77

Normally they had a daughter if they can marry them off to I mean look at the five good emperors. It all went to hell when Marcus Aurelius one of those more brilliant rulers of his day was like you know what I’m going to totally let my son be next emperor. At least from what I see with noble families to adoption they have to have somebody of their lineage close what relation of that to marry the new adopt son off too


#78

I believe Cata was referring to all Romans, both east and west - which I concur was more the norm then the exception. Perhaps this should be taken up in another thread so it won’t derail the WiP feedback.


#79

Regardless that this is still a very interesting question just for the lore of the setting. Because both death is high and closed and family obviously is a big deal in this world. So I wonder where he deviates from high Medieval ages inspiration.


#80

Oh I totally get where you’re coming from but the other end I feel like it actually adds to immersion because it shows the daily struggle of your position. And the mundane but deadly nature of it all.


#81

So, I’m undecided.

Obviously, I’d include queer relationships and queer people. I’m even going to try to figure out how to make enbys work (as evinced by the gender question).

The problem with same-sex marriage is the mortality rate. At certain points in history (Antiquity, and I assume the medieval period as well) women needed to have five children just to keep the population stable.

How do I square these two things? I think marriage has to be looked at as a vehicle for reproduction and inheritance first.

Could there be different rules for the commoners and the gentry? Maybe? But that would be hard to square theologically; Sénan is the law-giver. And yes, there are orphans. There’s even an Odo of orphans, who was born upriver from Ulmheit a few hundred years ago, and his odomas (monasteries) double as orphanages.

Anyway, it’s not a hard no. I’d just have to figure out a coherent justification for it.

In other news, I got started on the Calamities last night. I will post an update when they’re filled out more.


#82

There is also evidence of the practice in ancient Egypt and Greece. What counted in those days way the proud dynastic name and legacy and while you needed competent heirs to perpetuate it they needn’t necessarily be your children or even blood relatives.
Needless to say a system like that is much more amenable to gay men and if it’s a world where women are allowed to hold positions of authority in their own right lesbian women too.

In theory the world of XoR in the Hegemony seems to work like that for the upper classes at least, of course the blood-cattle class falls outside of most social conventions and must be made to propagate biologically to the greatest extent possible in order to maintain the system, which makes being gay for the people in it into a literal death sentence.

Just out of curiosity I know where most of the Infinite Sea falls on that spectrum but how are such matters dealt with in Kendrickstone?

No mules, no mules, pretty please no mules, argh!!! XoR have given me mule induced trauma. :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:

XoR has very different rules for its social classes, which isn’t too surprising given its religiously motivated strict caste system and even where that system doesn’t formally dictate such things it results in huge de-facto differences even in the few places where it should be equal de-jure.

Of course it was in pre-Christian antiquity that the concept of dynasty not being necessarily tied to bloodline was most prevalent. But then again only the then .1% probably needed to seriously worry about their dynastic legacy in the first place.

Finally of course adopting capable heirs can avoid nastiness such as regencies. As most CK2 players can probably tell you nothing wrecks your carefully build-up realm like a regency. :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:


Guns of Infinity
Guns of Infinity
#83

The negative oats is fine (in my opinion). If you read carefully, there’s a mechanism to buy oats when you don’t have them at the end of the accounting process. The long-term solution is to clear some more land and plant oats.

(I mean, if it would help, I could add a note there that would say “you will buy some to cover this shortage later”?)


#84

Sure, but I don’t want to harden the lines between the classes; I want them permeable, especially out here in the boonies, where, if you have multiple kids, the third or fourth might get married off to a yeoman. And, conversely, it wouldn’t be so out-of-the-blue for a thornet to take a wealthy yeoman or guildsperson as a spouse.

Moreover, I’m sure there are theological strains that are deeply uncomfortable with the idea of the classes and serfdom generally. Keeping the barriers permeable is what makes it tolerable for them. Hardening those barriers wouldn’t work.

Sure, and I’m willing to concede to the idea of adoption. The problem is still the replacement rate.

Sure, but regencies are great for drama! As evinced by the toddler thorne of Ulmheit and his mother!


#85

A valid course to take just as the opposite is (well not in real-life or course, in real life I hate it, but just like regencies a harsh caste/class system makes for great drama potential).

Which is, again, the total opposite of XoR, but it does mean the drama and tension need to come from somewhere else.

While it is very unequal and unfair the replacement rate is more of a women’s problem, as they have to bear the babies then it is for men. A couple of the wealthier gay men not reproducing doesn’t really make a significant dent in the replacement rate since there are always many eager straight guys to take their place.