• Out of Character • Feedback Forum

[Alistair]

Lorena, I actually believe we agree on a lot of things. My biggest complaint with this system is that it ruins the hierarchical system of aristocracy. It doesn't work at all like a real feudal nobility would, not even in the slightest. Also, I agree that heirs have special privileges and whatnot. However, I don't think we should simply say that non-heirs don't work for anything and shouldn't have their complaints considered. People who pursued baronies as nobles did so for the sake of ruling as a noble, and the end result of what they can rule is a lot less appealing to many people than they would've hoped, with the prospect of expanding land and rulership based solely on money; it makes a PC's plot soulless. Surely for military this is more appealing, since their plot revolves around more than just ruling. For noble barons, I think in general it is incredibly unappealing.

I think this system needs player feedback, which is why I am posting here and I'm sure the rest of you as well, and should be able to be opted out of.

[Celeste Andaris]

Hey all

Great to see such a lot of discussion about this, but I'm a bit concerned that we're going 'off track' slightly. Or focusing on very small (1/19th) aspects of the feedback given. I'm going to go about it backwards - sorry - the vagaries of scrolling up

Lorena's Points
Military barons and noble barons are different. Absolutely. Military barons have earned their rank, title and privilege. Totally. Noble barons are a bunch of layabouts who have (largely) not worked for it. Yep. Lorena is absolutely right, this is seeped in history. What, as she also raises, is seeped in history, is the fact that this has been how a number of societies have functioned. Rynmere is based on this. Therefore, it makes no sense that military barons be given more advantage than noble ones. Using the historical examples Lorena has raised, that is absolutely, 100% accurate.

Lei'lira's Points
Absolutely 100% agree. Military barons have totally earned their rights and privilege. They've achieved it through RP and that must not be forgotten or ignored.

So - taking those two into account, yes absolutely military barons seem to be absolutely spot on in this system in terms of what they should be.

Alistair's Points
I'm missing Xander, because he posted supporting Alistair's arguments.

I believe - and Alistair, please could you confirm.

1. The discrepancy between military and noble pc's you raise isn't a suggestion that military barons should be "de-powered" in any way - but in fact that this needs to be looked at in as a "whole package"? Currently, the most advantage is given to the military baron - but that just suggests a power differential that needs to be looked at in terms of the existing lore of Ryn? Is that right?

2. The discrepancy you raise is one out of 19 points. I'm keen that we give all of them attention. I'm not entirely sure that I understand your point about roads - and I disagree on the one about docks, I think - could you explain that further? Are you saying that docks should be taken out of the system and simply assumed?

3. My own barony revision is under review in the PSF (I chose not to opt out, although I was given that option also) - so I can't speak for the actual playing of it - but yes, I agree again with Lorena here. This game to me isn't about points or counting or maths. I am concerned that this new system seems to be very maths-focused / number focused. As a maths-phobic person, I fear that it will force me to focus on money and numbers rather than writing. I really hope not!

4. I'd really like to see Barony measured by more than military too! I think that's one of the 19 points you made, Alistair! Like - I had an idea for Celeste's barony and how she'd develop it that isn't focused on military. Of course, I'll need some military in there - but I wonder if we could look at that?

5. Second in line and below - for those not first in line and military barons this is as far as they'll go. I think it is important that we look at this with that lens. I hadn't really considered that in detail - but these are kind of 'money sumps' - if someone plays a Baron for 5 years, which we hope they do - what occurs.

I have to be honest - not a big fan of the new system. But I haven't played it yet.

Great to see so much feedback!

[Alistair]

Thanks Celeste. And good catch on these points, let me explain.

Military Discrepancy: Indeed. Not a depowering, I just think the packages should be defined and different. Right now it feels like Military Barons get everything Noble Barons get, and more, and more, as well as respect and more autonomy over themselves; nobles have to worry about politics, intrigue, marriages, etc just to get the same reward, if not lessened. It, in my opinion, shouldn't be the same thing for both parties in the first place; the packages should be different.

Roads: This point is one of the less important ones. I don't really care too much about it, haha. I was just saying maybe roads shouldn't be necessary, considering even ancient civilizations had roads between their settlements. It just makes me wonder if this is basically a colony you're building with no foundation/history/etc or what. I don't really like the colonial approach to this in general, so that's what funded this point.

Docks: I'm referring to the Resource 'Docks' on the list of the Duchy's resources, not the ones you can buy. All seven Duchies have docks listed as a resource, because Rynmere is an island. However, all of the other listed things are natural resources. Docks are not a natural resource; it's contradictory, and redundant, because if everyone has docks then there's no need to mention them as a Duchy specific resource.

Military Focus: Yeah. I had no interest for Oxentide to have a strong military. I was hoping for a strong navy at best, but not a strong military. However, everyone must have 1/5th of their population be a Knight. Typically, civilizations only employ their population into their military at a rate more close to 1/100th at the highest, and usually far less, around 1/300-500th. This is because it is incredibly difficult to pay for a military larger than a percentage of your population. It is, in fact, essentially impossible. So, not only does this restrict customization, but it would also result in - logically - all Baronies being incredibly bankrupt, or their Knights having absurdly low standards of living, to the point of squalor.

[Lorena]

Okay so let's start with the issues of 'soulless' plots and not enough value in being a noble due to discrepancies of power. So okay, a player works toward something that they've been trying to obtain and they want a barony - okay cool. Anybody can work toward anything in life, whether they succeed in their endeavor by going the right way about it is depends upon the relevant action.

In terms of storytelling if they wanted to achieve overthrowing their family they would have to go through a large amount of collaboration with other players and do drastic, even unsavory things that might put dirt on their name in the process of getting it. That's how it worked back in history, like I stated before and I don't understand why that would need to change either.

Soullessness is entirely down to the individual role player - creation is a part of our trade as writers and as creators of our own myths there is only so far a narrator can assist in helping you achieve that. In life the lesser nobility either accept their position or revolt, and revolution can be fun. It's dark and twisted, filled with potential dangers that could get you killed. When you're making a character in that kind of hierarchy system the trick is - know what you're in for. It's a collaborative space where you have to work with others. If there are plot of intrigue where either side could win due to some random and bizarre circumstance players are more likely to collaborate, because they have a chance at winning the game of chess or losing. If they lose they need to build themselves up again and maybe there's a revenge plot there somewhere. Again, we're here for the story - not only the achievement.

If lesser nobles need to feel fulfilled then what I might suggest as additional motivation and because you can only have one: Give Nobility a separate starting package. Maybe enough gold to buy a little bit of land where they can choose if they want to use it for that or buying a shit ton of shoes? Or whatever you wanna spend it on. Nobility are supposed to be rich, with rich dressed brought by their parents and likely a bit of a saving fund unless their parents are shrewd assholes that don't look after their children.

Military - I think we all agree it's cool they get a thing. I think that military should be able to have the ability to gain more power than current nobility through work and devotion of the people as a hero. (Cause that'd be hella fun to play out! for everyone.) Then they can just be added to the noble mismash of politics where eventually their sons and daughters will be a part of something bigger. So not everybody gets knighted! this is true. So have a rank among the knights that earns this barony for great deeds!

As for barony resources: I think the subject prices of resources could remain the same, just leave them available based upon the area where the barony is sought to reside. And maybe that could be a problem the king addresses in game? THERE IS NOT ENOUGH LAND. Too many barons - Rynmere event down. Bang.

I don't think we need to complicate stuff too much.

[Rei]

So is basically what everyone saying is that someone who spend a year working for a military barony shouldn't be given more advantages? Cause I gotta be honest that makes no sense. In life when you work for something you get advantages. You earn these things. It makes no sense that someone who has put zero effort into the story and making of the situation should have as many perks and advantages as someone who did. I mean if you want me to be brutally honest it kind of sounds like people just want all the perks and rewards without having to put out the effort. And that's just not how life works. Seniority on the site should matter because of the amount of time and effort they have sunk into making all this happen. It's kind of a slap in the face to those people who have worked for everything for every joe blow who wants to start a noble character to immediately get everything they had to actually work for.

[Tristan Venora]

I agree with Alistair on pretty much everything. The current system is not enjoyable at all. When I first read the new guide, I considered having Tristan say “fek you” and run away from it all because this wasn't what I had expected when I started playing a noble more than a year ago. To me it feels like some sort of browser game where you rule over a piece of land and have to build certain buildings in order to unlock other buildings now. It isn’t very flexible, and it’s simply boring. I don’t want to build farms and lumber mills and docks. I want to support the industries that already exist in my duchy (the Raglan family operate a vineyard for example). I want to trade with other duchies and other baronies. I want to tell a story and not crunch numbers, and I think a lot of people agree with this. Being a noble should be story-focused, and you should be able to develop your land through RP!

It also bothers me that we are supposed to pay for everything. Realistically, our subjects would earn money and pay taxes, as Alistair mentioned. The merchant families in the Eastern Settlement are rich, so why do I have to treat them as if they were a charity case and complete idiots that can’t feed themselves and are incapable of having jobs? And what if the people of the Eastern Settlement decide to rebel and get rid of Tristan? Then he will have spent all the money for nothing. I’m also for a return to the old system – or at least an opt-out option. If I could opt out of this, I definitely would.

[Alistair]

This is not the position I am representing. I am not saying they shouldn't have advantages period, but they shouldn't have advantages in the sole field that the nobles can acquire in their career. For the military Barons to have better leadership perks than the Noble Barons, when that is ALL they have, is unfair and discouraging.

In life when you work for something you get advantages. You earn these things. It makes no sense that someone who has put zero effort into the story and making of the situation should have as many perks and advantages as someone who did.

Two words in response to this: feudal aristocracy. Why did people rebel against the nobility by the tens of millions? Because they had incredibly unfair advantages. A feudal Kingdom with a noble class is not going to be a beacon of egalitarianism.

It makes no sense that someone who has put zero effort into the story and making of the situation should have as many perks and advantages as someone who did.

This is a level of elitism that is very demeaning to people who play noble characters. Are PCs like Elyna, Alistair, Celeste, Andraska, Zvezdana, Xander, Vaughn, etc making no effort and contributing nothing to the story? Additionally, all of the current Baron PCs have contributed a fair bit to the city's story.

All characters and their choices in Rynmere should be respected, instead of insulted simply because lore-wise they were born with it. That doesn't mean they don't make effort ICly.

I mean if you want me to be brutally honest it kind of sounds like people just want all the perks and rewards without having to put out the effort. And that's just not how life works. Seniority on the site should matter because of the amount of time and effort they have sunk into making all this happen. It's kind of a slap in the face to those people who have worked for everything for every joe blow who wants to start a noble character to immediately get everything they had to actually work for.

No noble PC has ever started as a Baron, except for Lazuli and Malcolm, and I think Vaughn.

Also, people do want to put in the effort. That's why many people disagree with a system based on money alone, one that doesn't integrate plot and story to it. It's pretty much entirely based on job threads.

To be completely honest, I find this idea that the nobility are somehow just undeserving of any perks because they're lazy and don't contribute to plot (which isn't true at all) very negative and crude.

Also, I would like for us to try addressing one of the other 18 points.

[Basilisk]

Uh. Lorena. On that last issue, about the availability of land. The exact opposite point is being made. It's not that there's too little land, it's that there's too much. The argument there is that baronies are ridiculously small for both the geographical and population size of Rynmere. A plot about Cassander eliminating baronies would actually make that problem worse, not better.

On the points about soulless plots. All excellent points. Don't seem to have anything to do with the barony mechanics, or how they effect plots, which is the point that's been raised. The issue Alistair raised there was that, since baronies can only be grown through monetary means, that's the way they'd have to be RP'd, which drastically limits the plots a player can do about growing their barony.

On the military issue. And Rei, this is replying to you too. The fact that this keeps getting taken in completely the wrong way is more than a little silly by now. >_< First off, no new player is getting a barony just because they play a noble PC. Don't work like that. If someone made a noble today and rocked up to the PSF asking for a barony, they'd get laughed right back out of the PSF. That being said, activity and effort matters more than simple seniority. If Leeson Andaris, who has been a character longer than most of the nobles, asked for a barony today, he'd get told no. He hasn't put in the work compared to Celeste, Alistair, or Malcolm.

The actual point being raised is that if two players put in the exact same amount of time and effort into their baronies, but one gets theirs via political means and the other through military means, the one who got theirs via military means gets an automatic bonus over the one who got theirs via other means. That is the problem Alistair wants to address, and it is an unfair advantage. We aren't going to take away that military advantage, but an equivalent boost for other methods of gaining a barony should be a thing.

As for the other 18 points....give me a bit. I'll have it up before I go to bed tonight.

[Vaughn]

Haha, speaking of complicating things, it's me, Q, with the math!!!

I did some number crunching. This is to compare 1+ years of military effort (which has been stated above as about the amount of time it takes to earn a military barony) and how much time it would take a noble, starting from scratch, to buy their own barony. Basically I was curious how the numbers worked out-- if the effort put into advancing a military career to baron and the effort put into working from scratch as a noble are equal, or indeed skewed in one direction or the other.

So, without further ado:

I'm going to keep it as simple as possible, so for now we're going to call a barony the equivalent of one town. Building a town requires 1,000 knights and 150 acres. Using the conversions given in the table and accounting for gn required, acres required, and money spent on extra documentation, I concluded that at a bare minimum a town costs approximately 48,000gn to build. This is with 1,000 knights in the 200 houses it would take to house them, with the 20 farms it would take to feed them. Altogether it takes 120 acres to house and feed 1,000 knights, but since the requirement for a town is 150 acres, that's what I went with when coming to my final conclusion. Math below under the sptitle if anyone's interested in how I worked it all out.

COSTS OF A TOWN

Conversions:
1 knight costs 10gn.
1 acre of land, costing 100gn per acre, can hold ten houses. 1 acre = 10 houses.
1 house, costing 50gn per house and taking up 1/10 of an acre of land, can hold 5 knights. 1 house = 5 knights.
1 farm, costing 500gn per farm and taking up 5 acres of land, can feed 50 knights. 1 farm = 50 knights.

To buy 1,000 knights it would cost 1,000 knights x (10gn/knight) = 10,000gn.

To house 1,000 knights it would take 1,000 knights x (1 house/5 knights) = 200 houses at a cost of 200 houses x (50gn/house) = 10,000gn. And 200 houses would take up 200 houses x (1 acre/10 houses) = 20 acres of land. To buy the 20 acres of land it would be 20 acres x (100gn/acre) = 2,000gn. So altogether to house 1,000 knights, it takes 200 houses at a cost of 10,000gn + 2,000gn for 20 acres of land for a total of 12,000gn.

So far, to buy and house 1,000 knights it would take 22,000gn.

To feed 1,000 knights it would take 1,000 knights x (1 farm/50 knights) = 20 farms at a cost of 20 farms x (500gn/farm) = 10,000gn. And 20 farms would take up 20 farms x (5 acres/farm) = 100 acres of land. To buy the 100 acres of land it would be 100 acres x (100gn/acre) = 10,000gn. So altogether to feed 1,000 knights, it takes 20 farms at a cost of 10,000gn + 10,000gn for 100 acres of land for a total of 20,000gn.

So, to buy, feed, and house 1,000 knights, it would take 22,000gn + 20,000gn = 42,000gn.

The requirements for a town is 1,000 knights AND 150 acres, and currently the amount of acres purchased is only 120 acres (to cover land for both housing and farms). The additional 30 acres would be 30 acres x (100gn/acre) = 3,000gn. And it costs an additional 3,000gn in documentation to start a town.

So, altogether, a town would cost 42,000gn + 3,000gn + 3,000gn = 48,000gn.

Now to calculate how long it would take for a player to buy a town. To be fair I calculated these results using a hypothetical player who would do a minimum of earning, so it would be a player who works one job per season, remaining in the same line of work to earn the 5,000gn bonus at the end of each year. In this hypothetical, I did not include increases in wages by skill level because that would be incredibly hard to include in such calculations (the rate at which a player would increase a skill is highly variable amongst players). So, the only increase in wages is the +2gn/day per season increase for remaining in the same line of work. The job I used had a 25gn cap limit (the least amount of money a player could earn in order to calculate the longest it would take to earn enough money). I taxed each season according to the Rynmere tax bracket, and also put the money in the bank and calculated yearly interest (assuming, in this case, that this person would not withdraw funds during the year).

Altogether, I found it would take approximately 3 years of uninterrupted job threads, earning a total of 57,744.93gn including taxation, interest from the bank, and all three 5,000gn bonuses to pay for a 48,000gn town in a barony.

Warning, a HELLA amount of math below:

MONEY EARNED BY A HYPOTHETICAL NOBLE PLAYER

Important numbers for calculating:
A player's wage starts at 4gn/day. For each new season spent working that job, they earn an additional +2gn/day.
This player has a job that has a cap limit of 25gn/day, meaning they will never earn more than 25gn/day in their profession.
At the end of each year, for working every season this player earns a 5,000gn bonus.
The Rynmere Bank has an interest rate of 25% if a player does not withdraw money throughout the year.
The Rynmere tax bracket says that if a player makes 0 - 4gn/day (beggar wages) they don't have to pay any taxes. If they make 5 - 10gn/day (poor wages) they have to pay 5% tax (0.05x modifier) and are excluded from the additional 4% Rynmere tax. If they make 11 - 30gn/day (common wages) they have to pay 10% tax and have to pay the additional 4% Rynmere tax, for a total tax of 14% (0.14x modifier).
Vhalar has 123 days, Zi'da 93 days, Cylus 30 days, Ashan 123 days, Ymiden 83 days, and Saun 40 days. Note: I decided to start the player out in Vhalar, when they should theoretically earn the least amount of money based on the timing of the year (123 days spent working for the lowest wage, etc.).

VHALAR, ARC 1 4gn/day x 123 days = 492gn. No taxes because they make 4gn or less per day.
ZI'DA, ARC 1 6gn/day x 93 days = 558 - (558 x 0.05 tax) = 530.1 + 492 = 1,022.1gn total.
CYLUS, ARC 1 8gn/day x 30 days = 240 - (240 x 0.05 tax) = 228 + 1,022.1 = 1,250.1gn total.
ASHAN, ARC 1 10gn/day x 123 days = 1,230 - (1,230 x 0.05 tax) = 1,186.5 + 1,250.1 = 2,418.6gn total.
YMIDEN, ARC 1 12gn/day x 83 days = 996 - (996 x 0.14 tax) = 856.56 + 2,418.6 = 3,275.16gn total.
SAUN, ARC 1 14gn/day x 40 days = 560 - (560 x 0.14 tax) = 481.6 + 3,275.16 = 3,756.76gn total.
End of year bonus = 5,000 + 3,756.76 = 8,756.76gn.
8,756.76 x (0.25) = 2,189.19gn interest from the bank + 8,756.76 = 10,945.95gn total.

VHALAR, ARC 2 16gn/day x 123 days = 1,968 - (1,968 x 0.14 tax) = 1,692.48 + 10,945.95 = 12,638.43gn total.
ZI'DA, ARC 2 18gn/day x 93 days = 1,674 - (1,674 x 0.14 tax) = 1,439.64 + 12,638.43 = 14,078.07gn total.
CYLUS, ARC 2 20gn/day x 30 days = 600 - (600 x 0.14 tax) = 516 + 14,078.07 = 14,594.07gn total.
ASHAN, ARC 2 22gn/day x 123 days = 2,706 - (2,706 x 0.14 tax) = 2,327.16 + 14,594.07 = 16,921.23gn total.
YMIDEN, ARC 2 24gn/day x 83 days = 1,992 - (1,992 x 0.14 tax) = 1,713.12 + 16.921.23 = 18,634.35gn total.
SAUN, ARC 2 25gn/day (CAP) x 40 days = 1,000gn - (1,000 x 0.14 tax) = 860 + 18,634.35 = 19,494.35gn total.
End of year bonus = 5,000 + 19,494.35 = 24,494.35gn.
24,494.35 x (0.25) = 6,123.59gn interest from the bank + 24,494.35gn = 30,617.94gn total.

VHALAR, ARC 3 25gn/day (CAP) x 123 days = 3,075 - (3,075 x 0.14 tax) = 2,644.5 + 30,617.94 = 33,262.44gn total.
ZI'DA, ARC 3 25gn/day (CAP) x 93 days = 2,325 - (2,325 x 0.14 tax) = 1,999.5 + 33,262.44 = 35,261.94gn total.
CYLUS, ARC 3 25gn/day (CAP) x 30 days = 750 - (750 x 0.14 tax) = 645 + 35,261.94 = 35,906.94gn total.
ASHAN, ARC 3 25gn/day (CAP) x 123 days = 3,075 - (3,075 x 0.14 tax) = 2,644.5 + 35,906.94 = 38,551.44gn total.
YMIDEN, ARC 3 25gn/day (CAP) x 83 days = 2,075 - (2,075 x 0.14 tax) = 1,784.5 + 38,551.44 = 40,335.94gn total.
SAUN, ARC 3 25gn/day (CAP) x 40 days = 1,000gn - (1,000 x 0.14 tax) = 860 + 40,335.94 = 41,195.94gn total.
End of year bonus = 5,000 + 41,195.94 = 46,195.94gn.
46,195.94gn x (0.25) = 11,548.99gn interest from the bank + 46,195.94gn = 57,744.93gn total.

Now that the math is out of the way, I'm interested to see how this compares effort put in by a military player vs a noble player. If I'm reading the barony page correctly, a military baron is given the starting advantage of 50 acres of land and 200 - 1,000 knights, whereas a noble baron seems to start with no advantage. Given this, a military baron starts with up to a 15,000gn headstart in land and knights. I'm assuming they would still have to pay for the rest of the stuff they wanted to buy to complete a town, like housing, farms, and extra land, just like any other baron. This means that in 1+ years of effort doing job threads for the military, they are handed part of a town and have to pay for the rest like any other player. In addition, unlike noble players military players have to level a number of particular military-related skills depending on their branch, along with the two skills it takes for a noble to have a town in their barony (politics and leadership).

In comparison, working the bare minimum with interest from the bank a noble player would earn enough money to buy a town for their barony in about 3 years. They would have to level politics and leadership but don't have to level any other skills to earn their position. And, should they choose to have a business, have a second job, have a job with a higher wage cap (>25), or marry another noble who can contribute to earning and spending, it would drastically cut down on the amount of time it would take to purchase the necessary knights, housing, and farms to support a town in their barony. For instance, it seems to me that having a second job would decrease the time spent by half.

Still, the last few points about having a secondary or multiple secondary sources of income could be said for a military baron as well.

All in all I just wanted to take a look at the math and the cost it would take to achieve the bare minimum in buying a town for a barony. It's not really up to me to weigh whether or not both sides take equal amounts of effort, but I would like to suggest, as others have before me, that perhaps some allowences or minor changes be made to the system if people think it's not equal; keep in mind, however, that at conception Rynmere was created to be a military power, so it makes sense in their society that a military baron might be looked upon with more favor (ie given more advantages) than a noble one. I myself don't have a problem with the math/numbers involved or the purchasing aspect of having a barony. I also think, as Lorena said, that having to purchase a barony in no way limits plot opportunities as other people have suggested, and that even though the purchase system is set up OOC'ly to focus on the military (through the purchase of knights) it seems to me it's up to each player to determine IC whichever aspect it is about their barony they want to focus on, whether that be military or something other. Simply don't focus on the military if you're not into that.

The only suggestions I can make are ones that others have already brought up. Perhaps earning more skill in politics and leadership could earn discounts or bonuses per level of expertise (novice, competent, expert, master, legendary), or perhaps a noble could have the option of starting with x amount of land or knights inherited from their parents/families. Also, if deemed necessary the amount that each item costs (knights, houses, farms, etc) could be slightly reduced or the ratios between them tweaked.

Phew, haha, that was a lot!

[Alistair]

Hey, Vaughn. Thank you for bringing these points forward. I appreciate you doing the math. The absurd amount of time required to acquire even a town is another reason I think this system should be changed or abolished.

I thank you for your research into this and your suggestions. I agree with many of these suggestions.

I would also like to point out something that I fundamentally disagree with, a statement that has raised a lot of eyebrows in recent months.

keep in mind, however, that at conception Rynmere was created to be a military power, so it makes sense in their society that a military baron might be looked upon with more favor (ie given more advantages) than a noble one.

This simply does not seem true. If one reads Rynmere's lore, it is incredibly focused on the nobles. The religion is focused on the nobles, the history is focused on the nobles, the majority of the lore seems focused on the nobles. For some reason, it appears that feelings towards this have changed, but the lore has not.

Let me provide some examples.

/viewtopic.php ... =20#p41764

This post, titled Government, lists the nobility above all else as the governing power. The Dukes and the King. The government is run by the nobility, so why would they not be the favored class?

"Knight Lord Commander: The Lord Commander is the highest ranking knight in Rynmere, a position currently held by Komodo Enthor. Komodo Enthor is in charge of Rynmere’s army and naval fleet, answering directly to the king."

The King is a noble, and the leader of the military answers to him. This means, of course, the country is run by a feudal aristocracy.

/viewtopic.php ... =30#p41777

In this post, it goes on to describe the banners and cloaks of the Knights and their colors and themes based on their region and the family they serve. The nobles seem to very clearly consider (a sentiment mutually felt I feel) the military as their bannermen, not as their overlords.

"Each region (known as a duchy) in Rynmere is governed by a Duke or Duchess, who oversees all of the dealings that go on in and around the outpost. These Dukes and Duchesses are summoned to Andaris City to sit in court at Andar Castle, sending a representative (Baron or Baroness) in their place if they cannot attend. It is a Duke’s job to advise the king and keep him informed as to the happenings in each region. Dukes are treated like generals and have their own forces and personal guard to command, ensuring that their assigned region is kept trouble free. A Duke of Duchess is a very powerful position to be in as these fourteen people help guide the King and Queen about all matters concerning the Kingdom of Rynmere.

The children of a Duke and Duchess claim the title of Baron or Baroness. They oversee large areas of land (barony) within the region and settle disputes, land claims, bylaws, and help their parents keep the region (duchy) in order. "

In particular, this quote:

"Each region (known as a duchy) in Rynmere is governed by a Duke or Duchess, who oversees all of the dealings that go on in and around the outpost."

All dealings - surely this looks like they're the overlords of the Duchy. The title also implies it. A Duke is, after all, the leader of a duchy. They own the land, they own the privilege, their dynasty is supreme in many ways. To say now that the system is actually one where the military is the highest caste is incredibly contradictory to the lore and the way everyone plays it.

Finally, let us not ignore that a great deal of the culture, traditions, holidays, beliefs and focuses of Rynmere circulates around the nobility. Also, despite being a tiny fraction of the population, they command incredible authority and seem to always fill the most important ranks; the Lord Commander is an Endor, the Emperor is a Krome. They are clearly the ruling class by virtually everything the lore presents, with no real counter-argument that I could find within the lore.

Sorry to focus on that one thing. It's just because I want to discuss this point of view - it doesn't seem accurate, based on the lore.