During the long waiting times that usually occur when one plays a North American Tribe, it suddenly occurred to me that the Tribal Councils are lacking in any special government mechanic; neither having Legitimacy, Republican Tradition or Devotion, while other Tribal Governments do. And, so, I found myself trying to think of not only a mechanic for them, but for all tribal/steppe governments in general, and this is what I came up with: Tribal Authority.
Tribal Authority would work like Legitimacy; high Authority gives bonus', low Authority gives malus' and the middle ground gives nothing. So, per the respective end of the spectrum, Tribal Authority (could) give +/-2 Unrest, +/-10% Vassal Income, and +/-2.5% Discipline.
However, unlike Legitimacy, which is more dependent on the dynasty and international relationships, Tribal Authority is dependent on the ruler: the success or failure of a tribe hinges upon it's leader's ability to hold it together. Things that could effect Tribal Authority passively would be:
Prestige; positive prestige contributes to tribal authority, low prestige does the opposite, much like Legitimacy.
Vassals; every vassal you have increases tribal authority, while every war you have against a rebellious vassal would decrease it for it's duration.
Monarch Points; the particular strengths of a ruler would be one of the most decisive factors, a ruler having any category above 3 would increase it per that category, while the opposite would be true. So, for example, a ruler who is 0/3/6 would give no tribal authority, but would not decrease it either.
Length of Rule/Ruler being general; a ruler who has either reigned for a long period of time (+25 years?) or leads his troops on the battlefield would increase Authority, while a ruler who has reigned a short period of time (-10 years?) or is not a general would do the opposite.
Actions that would actively effect Tribal Authority could be:
Certain Events and Decisions (obviously)
Gaining and Losing Vassals; vassalizing other nations would increase authority, while the opposite is true. Being vassalized would be devastating to TA.
Rebellions; having rebels enforce their demands would decrease TA, while putting down rebellions would increase authority, scaling per rebel type (Pretenders and Nobles would give a bit more than Zealots, for example).
Changes in Leadership; Losing your old ruler by whatever means would decrease TA, scaling per the age of the new ruler (the younger, the bigger the impact). I would suggest making tribal monarchies 'immune' to regencies in the same way Hordes are, if only to keep them from fall apart at the seams if a child succeeds the throne.
Opinions?
Edit: Having gotten a few hours of sleep since posting this, I now realize this probably wasn't my most thought out suggestion.
Tribal Authority would work like Legitimacy; high Authority gives bonus', low Authority gives malus' and the middle ground gives nothing. So, per the respective end of the spectrum, Tribal Authority (could) give +/-2 Unrest, +/-10% Vassal Income, and +/-2.5% Discipline.
However, unlike Legitimacy, which is more dependent on the dynasty and international relationships, Tribal Authority is dependent on the ruler: the success or failure of a tribe hinges upon it's leader's ability to hold it together. Things that could effect Tribal Authority passively would be:
Prestige; positive prestige contributes to tribal authority, low prestige does the opposite, much like Legitimacy.
Vassals; every vassal you have increases tribal authority, while every war you have against a rebellious vassal would decrease it for it's duration.
Monarch Points; the particular strengths of a ruler would be one of the most decisive factors, a ruler having any category above 3 would increase it per that category, while the opposite would be true. So, for example, a ruler who is 0/3/6 would give no tribal authority, but would not decrease it either.
Length of Rule/Ruler being general; a ruler who has either reigned for a long period of time (+25 years?) or leads his troops on the battlefield would increase Authority, while a ruler who has reigned a short period of time (-10 years?) or is not a general would do the opposite.
Actions that would actively effect Tribal Authority could be:
Certain Events and Decisions (obviously)
Gaining and Losing Vassals; vassalizing other nations would increase authority, while the opposite is true. Being vassalized would be devastating to TA.
Rebellions; having rebels enforce their demands would decrease TA, while putting down rebellions would increase authority, scaling per rebel type (Pretenders and Nobles would give a bit more than Zealots, for example).
Changes in Leadership; Losing your old ruler by whatever means would decrease TA, scaling per the age of the new ruler (the younger, the bigger the impact). I would suggest making tribal monarchies 'immune' to regencies in the same way Hordes are, if only to keep them from fall apart at the seams if a child succeeds the throne.
Opinions?
Edit: Having gotten a few hours of sleep since posting this, I now realize this probably wasn't my most thought out suggestion.
Last edited:
- 2
Upvote
0
