Medieval & Fantasy Minecraft Roleplaying

Greetings Explorer, Navigate into the Lobby!

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Be sure to "Get Whitelisted" to join the community on server!

[Proposal] War Guidelines

Rygan

Deathblade
Evil
Rygan_Deathblade
Rygan_Deathblade
Evil


War Guidelines (draft one)

I. Casus Belli
II. Consent

I. Revival
III. Mechanics
I. Travel
II. Skirmishes
III. Battles
IV. Naval Battles
V. Sieges


I. Casus Belli - “an act or situation provoking or justifying war.”

By granting the enemy a valid Casus Belli, the offending faction consents to war. Valid Casus Belli are:

- The killing of another realm’s nobility without serious punishment of the murderer
- The raiding of another realm’s land, including castles, villages, and forts
- Plotting to assassinate or depose another realm’s nobility, if discovered
- Plotting or preparing for war, if discovered by a bordering realm
- The breaking of treaty terms
- Settling of land within another realm’s borders [Author's note - If you claim stupid amounts of land without having the regions to back it up, staff will likely deny your claim for war. Abuse the system and the system will abuse you.]
- Unlawful detainment of another realm’s nobility or peasantry.
- Thievery of another realm’s heirloom, such as a crown or religious scepter
- The sinking of trade ships or the raiding of caravans
- The mobilizing of fighting men on another realm’s borders
- If a local lord vassalized, plotting against your monarch is cause for valid Casus Belli on their part
- If declaring war, the target’s allies may join on their side

Before declaring war with a Casus Belli, a faction must submit a request with the offense to the moderation team. It will then be either approved or denied.

II. Consent - When a faction consents to war, who within it does?
I. Revival


Anyone classified as an ‘active fighter’ consents to violence. Active fighters include the land owning nobility of a realm and anyone else listed in threads provided and maintained by the leadership of the opposing realms. To prevent disorder, each side will have only one thread. Any allies fighting together, be it as part of a coalition, pact, or treaty, will share a thread. Neither side may use anyone unlisted in battles or skirmishes. The lists may be edited to remove and add players as their characters desert or join a side.

Active fighters may not revive until the war has concluded (or at the end of a single month in which there are no battles or sieges), at which point any in the queue will revive all at once.

Citizens are not valid targets and do not consent unless they remain in the area of a known battle or siege, and do not have to be listed as active fighters.

III. Mechanics
I. Travel
II. Skirmishes
III. Battles
IV. Naval Battles
V. Sieges


To reach a destination to begin a battle or a siege, an army must march. A march includes the actual movement of the army and the setting up of a war camp. While encamped, an army may raid any opposing faction’s war camps if located within 1000 blocks or engage in a field battle. Marching is not limited to one side, making it possible to cut off an enemy army and face them in the field. If two opposing sides set up war camps within 1000 blocks of each other, neither may advance until one side has been routed or has chosen to retreat back. An army moving by land will need a total of two stops to reach an enemy bordering their own realm, taking three days for each, and a total of three stops at three days each for an enemy who does not. A fleet of ships will take six days to reach its destination with one stop, allowing opportunity for a fleet to be sent to meet them. If travelling within the local area, discuss with the DM a more reasonable time - one should not take six days to sail from their bay to an ally across a small gap of sea. Travel times may be smudged and cut as needed for events to occur on dates that both factions find best for them, so long as there is mutual agreement to do so.

If an army is marching within its own borders to deal with a treasonous vassal or a foreign invader, they may set up a war camp within the previously mentioned borders without travel time.

Confrontation between enemy armies fall into four categories: skirmishes, battles, naval battles, and sieges.

A skirmish is any fight between active fighters outside of a planned event. They require no DM.

A battle is a large scale attack on the opposing faction. It requires working out a date for an event with the leadership of the enemy so both sides can field their faction’s members, and messaging the event team to notify them of your plans so they can bring an appropriate amount of DMs to the event. A war camp within 1000 blocks of the intended battlefield is required.

A naval battle requires the creation of an event with staff DMs and the opposing faction’s leadership, following the same general rules as above. Bombardment of coastal forts and cities are counted underneath this.

Sieges require a war camp within 500 blocks of the location, an event with the staff team and opposing faction, and at least six days between the establishment of the camp and the siege if constructing war machines beyond simple ladders and rams. If storming the gates without any of these things, such as in a naval landing, then consider these pre-requisites null at DM discretion..
 
Last edited:

Ced

Mountain Bum
Merchant
Retired Staff
MossyMorel
MossyMorel
Merchant
I like it but I'm not sure I understand what you mean by stops in the travel section. Could you elaborate on that?
 

Rygan

Deathblade
Evil
Rygan_Deathblade
Rygan_Deathblade
Evil
I like it but I'm not sure I understand what you mean by stops in the travel section. Could you elaborate on that?
Stopping to set up camp for a bit, in the case of land marching. For the sea travelling, it's mostly just 'slow ur roll so they can have a chance to react.' Intention is to promote more naval engagements and battles in the field rather than solely in regions.
 

MRPolo13

The Arbiter of the Gods
Requesting that DMs be unbiased and not associated with either faction is shitposting? Or that noblemen shouldn't be forced into fighting? Actually in reality noblemen should be the first to be able to drop out of fighting. They have the power to opt out. The other two points are joking, of course, but can also be seen as fair in their own right.
 

DraconDarknight

Lord of Altera
DraconDarknight
DraconDarknight
Requesting that DMs be unbiased and not associated with either faction is shitposting? Or that noblemen shouldn't be forced into fighting? Actually in reality noblemen should be the first to be able to drop out of fighting. They have the power to opt out. The other two points are joking, of course, but can also be seen as fair in their own right.
Sadly one of them has actually happened before....

Also I would appriciate it if posts where I state that I was serious wouldn't get deleted - thank you.
If you can't take feedback don't open discussions.

So again:
- No DM must be aligned, and this adds to being allied, to either faction
- The above is nullified if there is an equal amount of aligned DMs from both sides.
- No ballista must ever have the firepower of an 18inch gun
- Nobles must not be forced to fight.
- No cataclysm must befall either, or both parties of the battle.
 
Last edited:

Rygan

Deathblade
Evil
Rygan_Deathblade
Rygan_Deathblade
Evil
Requesting that DMs be unbiased and not associated with either faction is shitposting? Or that noblemen shouldn't be forced into fighting? Actually in reality noblemen should be the first to be able to drop out of fighting. They have the power to opt out. The other two points are joking, of course, but can also be seen as fair in their own right.
It's clearly pointed jabs and thinly veiling them as something else. Yes, a lot of things happened in that battle that were a result of lack of knowledge on the DM's part, but they effected us as badly as they did the Coalition (i.e. someone rolling assassins creed style out of the way of a seven foot lance, or 1400s cannons collapsing an entire section of our castle) and we don't complain at every opportunity. We actually lost the main battle due to DMs allowing all our horses to be headshotted in a cavalry charge by like four archers. I don't see that as biased.
 

LeftwardElk

Lord of Altera
If you guys are deleting post that actually bring up good points because you think they're shitposting. Then every single one of cap's post should be deleted lol.
 

Cap

Lord of Altera
Legend
If you guys are deleting post that actually bring up good points because you think they're shitposting. Then every single one of cap's post should be deleted lol.
i asked staff to delete my response to the shitposting

dont think they're biased in our favour because they're not
 

MRPolo13

The Arbiter of the Gods
It's clearly pointed jabs and thinly veiling them as something else. Yes, a lot of things happened in that battle that were a result of lack of knowledge on the DM's part, but they effected us as badly as they did the Coalition (i.e. someone rolling assassins creed style out of the way of a seven foot lance, or 1400s cannons collapsing an entire section of our castle) and we don't complain at every opportunity.
I wasn't there, so I can't comment. Still, you're ignoring the first two points: DMs shouldn't be biased and nobility shouldn't be automatically included in war. The first point especially should be considered obvious.
 

DraconDarknight

Lord of Altera
DraconDarknight
DraconDarknight
It's clearly pointed jabs and thinly veiling them as something else. Yes, a lot of things happened in that battle that were a result of lack of knowledge on the DM's part, but they effected us as badly as they did the Coalition (i.e. someone rolling assassins creed style out of the way of a seven foot lance, or 1400s cannons collapsing an entire section of our castle) and we don't complain at every opportunity. We actually lost the main battle due to DMs allowing all our horses to be headshotted in a cavalry charge by like four archers. I don't see that as biased.
Which is why we shpould make sure its not happening again, no?
Also if it was 14000 cannons as you say - parts of the castle would indeed collapse. Cannonballs are actually heavy enough to damage stone buildings.
Note that this was a comparably small cannon to what you'd use in a siege - Ship cannons would deal about that though - So a sufficient amount of them could actually collapse a building.
i asked staff to delete my response to the shitposting

dont think they're biased in our favour because they're not
There was no shit posting to begin with. If I were shitposting you would certainly recognize it.
If you can't take additions or cirticism then don't post stuff on a forum, which is by definition meant for discussion.
 

Rygan

Deathblade
Evil
Rygan_Deathblade
Rygan_Deathblade
Evil
I wasn't there, so I can't comment. Still, you're ignoring the first two points: DMs shouldn't be biased and nobility shouldn't be automatically included in war. The first point especially should be considered obvious.
I'm not particularly addressing you with that bit, I wrote that after seeing Dracon's later post accusing DM bias at a previous event, which can be taken from the context of his other jabs. -

Nobles can withdraw and go into hiding or whatever, but if you own a castle and stay by your lord who's being invaded you shouldn't be able to avoid invasion imo.
 

Cap

Lord of Altera
Legend
Which is why we shpould make sure its not happening again, no?
Also if it was 14000 cannons as you say - parts of the castle would indeed collapse. Cannonballs are actually heavy enough to damage stone buildings.
Note that this was a comparably small cannon to what you'd use in a siege - Ship cannons would deal about that though - So a sufficient amount of them could actually collapse a building.
that wall is barely half as thick as our wall and isn't reinforced. that's also an adobe wall. a clay wall. not solid rock.
 

Elz

hmm
Events Staff
Very Sweet
Staff
Sadly one of them has actually happened before....

Also I would appriciate it if posts where I state that I was serious wouldn't get deleted - thank you.
If you can't take feedback don't open discussions.

So again:
- No DM must be aligned, and this adds to being allied, to either faction
- The above is nullified if there is an equal amount of aligned DMs from both sides.
- No ballista must ever have the firepower of an 18inch gun
- No cataclysm must befall either, or both parties of the battle.
It's not your thread, so no you don't get to request it. Thankyou for wording your response in a way that didn't feel like shitposting, because there was obviously some confusion there. I also don't appreciate the 'Sadly one of them has actually happened before....' as I'm sure all staff DMs work pretty hard in any scenario, and being blatantly biased isn't something Lannis does (He's the DM I think you're referring to, since he's one of the only people to DM a war in the past year).

I deleted posts to keep Rygan's thread clean of irrelevant messages, because this is a good productive thread and he's opening something he's worked on to get feedback. I'll keep doing so, if I feel the need. Be civil, folks.
 

DraconDarknight

Lord of Altera
DraconDarknight
DraconDarknight
that wall is barely half as thick as our wall and isn't reinforced. that's also an adobe wall. a clay wall. not solid rock.
Solid rock doesn't really fare much better - Cannonballs are rather heavy and this particular cannon was rather small. Please also note how it went through it like it was butter and didn't feel stopped at all. Also, the cannon was way smaller than your avarage medieval siege or even ship cannon

So yeah a dozens of cannons could actually collapse parts of a keep (mind you I'd still use trebuchets over them any time)I'd still use trebuchets over them any time.

It's not your thread, so no you don't get to request it.
Forums are meant for discussion - all I'm gonna say to that.

and being blatantly biased isn't something Lannis does (He's the DM I think you're referring to, since he's one of the only people to DM a war in the past year).
Must be a misunderstanding here, because I never said he was biased - I said stuff happened that should have happened and should never happen again in future events.
 
Last edited:

Cap

Lord of Altera
Legend
Solid rock doesn't really fare much better - Cannonballs are rather heavy and this particular cannon was rather small. Please also note how it went through it like it was butter and didn't feel stopped at all. Also, the cannon was way smaller than your avarage medieval siege or even ship cannon

So yeah a dozens of cannons could actually collapse parts of a keep (mind you I'd still use trebuchets over them any time)I'd still use trebuchets over them any time.


Forums are meant for discussion - all I'm gonna say to that.



Must be a misunderstanding here, because I never said he was biased - I said stuff happened that should have happened and should never happen again in future events.
how u gon hit the same part of the wall over and over
 

Rygan

Deathblade
Evil
Rygan_Deathblade
Rygan_Deathblade
Evil
I'm ok with all the other discussions but not the cannon one, we can be pedantic about cannons somewhere else.
 

DraconDarknight

Lord of Altera
DraconDarknight
DraconDarknight
Getting back to the topic.
'preparing for war, if discovered'

this needs to be specified a bit more please. Otherwise a preparing a war against b gives X (not allied to either) a casus belli against a.
 
Top