…I assumed you were implying that’s all I did.
If I was incorrect in that assumption, then I apologize.
If I had to deal with baron rebellion…
maybe take their land and give it to more loyal people thereby encouraging loyalty while punishing treason.
@Jeantown would that work?
Gotta make sure all the good land goes to my loyal followers and subordinates.
The filthy traitors can get the dregs.
1 Like
You let them alive? Anyone who betray me will have a slow and very painful death.
Can’t let word get out that I torture traitors to death.
Other traitors might use it to demonize me and start a rebellion.
And if arthur caught wind it would be a massive problem.
Gotta rule with just the right amount of force.
Not too much to scare the populace and not too little to let them walk all over arthur.
I am disgusted by Arthur’s weakness! At least is easy to manipulate him.
Mercy is not the same as weakness.
3 Likes
Exactly, but Arthur is definitely short sight. You could be merciful and know what consequences that could bring to you and your kingdom. Arthur has zero idea about that, he only see his ideals. Like with Sheeps in Castle or when he just go blindly after a fake Guen leaving all the kingdom unattended. He just need a common sense transfusion. But he is a good guy he just need matured and well seeing how really the world works
Mercy is making people to do mistakes. Letting enemies alive from mercy is a weakness.
I would disagree that Arthur has “zero idea about that”. Arthur may have made a very silly decision in regards to the sheep, but the idea was looking at what was good for Britain, not merely some kind of abstract idealism.
As short sighted decisions go, it’s a far cry from this:
I’m not going to say Arthur is perfectly flawless or close, but not being like Larionov is something we can be pretty sure of.
@Damian Tell that to Basil II. I mean, he only ruled for forty-nine (misremembered - 976, not 975, to 1025) years (thirty-six if we measure from after the unsuccessful attempts to overthrow him were crushed for good), what would he know, right?
You would let Hrothulf alive?
I would consider it. I’d rather have peace with the Romano-Saxons than a blood feud, and the latter is a potential consequence of killing him.
Peace until they will be strong enough to attack you again. Peace cannot last forever.
Because people will just fight wars because its been too long since the last one?
Yes. If you kill their leader now and attack them when they are weakened, then you can have peace! 
Auferre, trucidare, rapere, falsis nominibus imperium; atque, ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
is not a way to encourage people to consider Britain’s well being as consistent with their own, and being without allies is a dangerous situation.
Yes, people will fight because there was too long since last it Was common in Spain during the medieval. If a peace treaty was signed for twenty years normal is one or both sides starting battles over 15 or 18 until a open war it was considered good to determine different kingdoms situations. It was normal in the century war and between crusades. Remember that medieval mentality and ours is outside down basically. we have more in common with an ancient roman than anyone from pre Renaissance Europe
Who say you can’t have allies? Just be sure to betray them first. Allies can be useful, not trustworthy.
@poison_mara
Even the medieval mentality fought if it felt there was some actual gain to doing so, as opposed to purely for war’s own sake whether with potential profit or not.
@Damian The fact no one would ally with you? Ever?
I’m all for Byzantine diplomacy, but this isn’t Byzantine diplomacy you’re advocating.
There will be always alliances for profit, or else. And you can conceal why you start wars. You can say you do this for your people’s good! Or because you are threatened. Trust me, politics and wars have nothing to do with honor.
It’s all pain and no gain to be a backstabber’s ally.
So politics and war are most successfully conducted by those who are either always strongest (not something you can rely on), or at least honorable enough that people will trust enough to believe cooperating with will be beneficial.