Playing influential characters/Influence trough numbers

Geneviève wrote:
Some Duchys were enormous, but within the Kingdom of England alone, a tiny little strip of land, there were 42 Duchys between the years 1337-1707.
.

... Whaaaaat?


Awesome-ness aside, I agree with the above-statement(s), but I've always wondered one thing...


Okay, lets say I create a new human character named Vlad Dracula (Level 1 of course) and then instantly 'obtaining' the rank of Count through the RP Background made for this character. (( The Background would mostly 'Generic 101' drama/stormwind-related, along with some heroic battles and whatnot, and his character being somewhat like Count Dracula is. ))

Now the questions I wanted to ask.

1) Would I be 'instantly' ignored/blacklisted?
2) Would someone contact me/have to contact someone?
And lastly, 3) If 'accepted', Wouldn't this create some RP chaos/OOC?


And to clarify... No, I won't be creating 'Count Vlad Dracula', simply because I don't have the time due to work and other mental-problems, insanity included.

Duke Geldar von Angelos of the 7th Legion, tempting!

Geldar wrote:Duke Geldar von Angelos of the 7th Legion, tempting!

Sorry Geldar... there's actually already a duke in the high command of the 7th Legion in lore . Duke August Foehammer.

Gahalla wrote:

Geldar wrote:Duke Geldar von Angelos of the 7th Legion, tempting!

Sorry Geldar... there's actually already a duke in the high command of the 7th Legion in lore . Duke August Foehammer.

No one said that there couldn't be two dukes in in the 7th legion, now did they...?

But... Geldar is not fit to clean Jarrics boots so he cant be a duke!

Lexgrad/Dreth wrote:But... Geldar is not fit to clean Jarrics boots so he cant be a duke!

My answer:

Spoiler:

However, I agree with the previous posts made from Aleric/Gahalla regarding the titles. Some really good points raised there. Especially regarding the whole Count/Duke thing.

Azmariel wrote:


Awesome-ness aside, I agree with the above-statement(s), but I've always wondered one thing...


Okay, lets say I create a new human character named Vlad Dracula (Level 1 of course) and then instantly 'obtaining' the rank of Count through the RP Background made for this character. (( The Background would mostly 'Generic 101' drama/stormwind-related, along with some heroic battles and whatnot, and his character being somewhat like Count Dracula is. ))

Now the questions I wanted to ask.

1) Would I be 'instantly' ignored/blacklisted?
2) Would someone contact me/have to contact someone?
And lastly, 3) If 'accepted', Wouldn't this create some RP chaos/OOC?


And to clarify... No, I won't be creating 'Count Vlad Dracula', simply because I don't have the time due to work and other mental-problems, insanity included.

I don't think it should be a problem. Admittadly we've...retconned Tarvik to be a higher ranking noble than we originally planned based upon the success of the Seal. But at the end of the day we're all just 'deciding' to be something. I really have no problem with anyone rocking up as any rank they want to be. The more 'My Lord Eastvale', 'your Grace', 'Baron Sunnyglade' etcs the better really.

What I can imagine myself...wrinkling my nose at would be claims of immense manpower etc without actual RPers in service to back it up which you might argue is connected to chosen title in a way. But there are surely enough near bankrupted Dukes, Counts, and Barons around to justify high ranked nobles really having very little to show for it? Especially with Stormwind having been razed to the ground, the Kingdom over run, and three decades of war. Varian might have invested personal friends and war heroes to very high positions but their new vassals resent them, don't appreciate being led by a butcher's son, or simply there has not been time to raise new troops after a tragic campaign. There are dozens of reasons why rank and 'power' need not nessecarily be connected. These are turbulent times, after all.

What I can imagine myself...wrinkling my nose at would be claims of immense manpower etc without actual RPers in service to back it up which you might argue is connected to chosen title in a way.

An RPer's merit is seen by the quality, creativity and initiative in the RP he creates and promotes, not the numbers of people he can field in a straight line behind him.

And in the given example above, I would stand behind the former, rather than the latter.

Meh, power is never just about numbers of troops. Money is power, position is power, friends in high places are power, having the church back you is power, the people are power.

Power is never a simple thing to wield.

In essence Lex, its how you RP it out that makes the impact and gives the people perception of the character and his title/position, everything else is well, minor details.

Or if you want to rp as a powerful noble. Jarric is basicly a fat slob with screw you money, no manners to those he conciders to be of no importance to him and a hand full of ambition. XD

I recognised that in my initial post, Lex. I said '"immense manpower" not immense power.

That's all well and good. If somebody can portray a realistic broken Duke more props to them than someone who can barely string a sentence together RPing a poet. But if you want to portray a Count with an immense personal army, you do need to back that up with RPers who can portrey that for you, otherwise it's just hot air.

The same is true today as was true then. Nobody is scared of economic sanctions, nobody is worried you'll run and tell the UN, when push comes to shove people are scared of the big Five. The countries with great military power and great projection of power. Everything else is merely...illusory. Money is a form of power, because of the manpower, training, and equipment it represents. Influence is a form of power because of the favours you can call in from people who have physical power. Friendship with the Church is a form of power because of it's ability to bring the people around to your side. The people are everything. Why? Because their support is potential manpower.

Everything boils down to manpower. Because without men to be paid money is useless. Without people to worship the Church is merely a commune of old men. Without boots on the ground equipment stockpiles, armouries, food caches, fuel depots, they're all inanimate resources.

I agree with the first paragrath. Mind you Dreth introduces himself as captin these days XD

Do the Oil rich states not have power? If iraq or lybia had the saudis oil it would have fallen differently.

Lexgrad/Dreth wrote:I agree with the first paragrath. Mind you Dreth introduces himself as captin these days XD

Do the Oil rich states not have power? If iraq or lybia had the saudis oil it would have fallen differently.

Iraq and Libya do have oil...Libya's reserves are the largest in Africa, Iraq's the largest in the world. Didn't help them squat, Saddam even played the religion card by adding "God is Great" to the Iraqi flag.

The West is criticised for only intervening in states with oil.

Saudi Arabia works with NATO because if they did not we would likely intervene militarily to protect our interests. If they had no oil they would likely be safe from Western aggression. If North Korea had oil you can bet we'd have fought tooth and nail for every yard north of the 38th Parallel.

But the difference is that the loss of their productions does little. Saudi arabia however is a huge share of the market. Enough that they can get away with the same shit as Gadaffi and sadam, but it is too risky to do anything. If the saudis stopped playing ball the house of cards falls. Sadam/lybia is just a few cards.

ETA they produced over a third of OPEC oil in 2005

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OPEC#Production_disputes

Lexgrad/Dreth wrote:But the difference is that the loss of their productions does little. Saudi arabia however is a huge share of the market. Enough that they can get away with the same shit as Gadaffi and sadam, but it is too risky to do anything. If the saudis stopped playing ball the house of cards falls. Sadam/lybia is just a few cards.

The global price for oil has risen dramatically in line with fallen production in Iraq and Libya.

Saudi Arabia get away with it because they do as we say. They let us use their country as staging areas for invasion, giving us the second componant required for manpower, projection of power. The Saudi Royal family have been labelled as traitors to the faith by Al'Qaeda and the Taliban for allowing NATO to station female soldiers within their country. They've surrendered everything to us in exchange for the peace to prosper from their oil. They have permission to prosper with the US's say so, but very little power.

They have total fuck you power. They turn off their pumps and prices go through the roof! Think of america going bankrupt, what good are their soldiers and tanks then.

Lexgrad/Dreth wrote:They have total fuck you power. They turn off their pumps and prices go through the roof! Think of america going bankrupt, what good are their soldiers and tanks then.

Sheikh Yamani disagrees with you. Take a cursory glance at the article you yourself linked.

As of November 2010, OPEC members collectively hold 79% of world crude oil reserves and 44% of the world’s crude oil production, affording them considerable control over the global market.[6] The next largest group of producers, members of the OECD and the Post-Soviet states produced only 23.8% and 14.8%, respectively, of the world's total oil production

That is power.

Lexgrad/Dreth wrote:As of November 2010, OPEC members collectively hold 79% of world crude oil reserves and 44% of the world’s crude oil production, affording them considerable control over the global market.[6] The next largest group of producers, members of the OECD and the Post-Soviet states produced only 23.8% and 14.8%, respectively, of the world's total oil production

That is power.

I mean you saw what the Russians could do with their gas pipe, that is an unsubtle swing of the power bat but it demonstrates how much they have the importers by the bals. It is nothing compaired to the above.

You're backing up my argument and you're not even aware of it.

Half of the oil Sheikhs owe their position to British manpower.

In the past we propped up their failing rule with liberal use of the SAS, now we bring down OPEC member states with...a liberal use of the armed forces.

They may have oil, but as Sheikh Yamani confesses if we didn't have oil we'd develop technologies to replace it. "We didn't leave the stone age because we ran out of stones."

It's neo-colonialism at it's finest, our gunboats are the multinational corporations we use to bleed weaker countries dry. And when people try to upset our status quo - Saddam in Kuwait - we put boots on the ground.

Everything comes back to force and threat of force.

Edit: Yet Russia was still forced to withdraw from Georgia after the EU chose to involve itself in the mediation process. Economics have a part to play in conflict, WW1 was drawn to a halt because of economics. Germany could no longer support it's armed forces.

This was my point all along, acknowledging different sources of power, but in the end it boils down to manpower, or the lack of it.

Please dont patronise

If you hand someone a gift under the impression they will be friends (ie SAS proping them up) once given it can not be withdrawn. We cant use the sas to un-prop them up.

Anyway my main point is that you must accept that the threat of the saudis/opec withholding production/export is a valid threat and is an example of power without a single soldier.

Except that the Americans now have fully established military bases within Saudi Arabia, an aircraft carrier fleet stationed in the gulf, and an army capable of bringing down the entire peninsula in the region, an army sitting ontop of the worlds largest oil reserves. Oil reserves now being exploited by American companies, reserves secured through manpower.

If you don't think the SAS can be used to 'un-prop up countries' what do you make of the reports of their direct involvement alongside the Libyan Rebels?

Some gifts are a double edged sword, once accepted you can't give them back without great difficulty. Even the UK and Japan have had struggles shifting US bases.

It's a valid threat to our capacity to live a much better life than them. But if they don't sell oil their entire economy goes under. Trade goes both ways. The monarchy may not suffer, but the people would, and whilst our people are fairly docile, they've already narrowly avoided insurrection twice (to my very limited knowledge) in the past few decades. And without the people...Well, look at Gaddafi.

The Saudi's can threaten my capacity to drive to the shops, but not NATO's capacity to wage war. If they could they'd have a permenant security council seat by now.

My point was and always has been that there are many sources of power, but all of them translate - sooner or later - into manpower, or threat of force.

Real-life geopolitics on world wide level has nothing to do with feudal noblety in a fantasy scenario-world, so do not attempt to compare either together simply because it will not work, at all.

Thread is derailing... Does Braiden deserve that?