Personal Treasury of a Regent

[X-Points East]

OoC:

Should a regent generally receive a salary from the domain, which he rules, thereby potentially bringing personal treasuries and the finances (convert wealth) action more into play?

[Ruideside/OM (RP)]

That would depend on the form the regent's rule takes. In the case of most nobles no, but in those cases where the regent could be construed as the employee (i.e. is an office holder) then possibly so.

[HBoT/JA (Viktor)]

For a noble, one could argue that the land and holdings belong to him, therefore the domain's treasury is his own.

For a temple/ guild domain it could be seen as corruption if a regent starts funneling the domain's revenue to his pocket and may cause uproar/ stability/ bloodline loss etc depending on the domain's alignment. 

In regards to the salary idea, we need to keep an equilibrium otherwise we would be generating money from nothing. I.e. if a domain degrees that the regent will have a salary of X GBs per turn, then that should be an additional cost for the domain over and above any existing maintenance cost.

I personally have found very limited use for the convert wealth action. It could be potentially useful if a noble is deposed (he can keep his money to fight back)

[Talinie & NIT/TD (Linde)]

OoC:

Should a regent generally receive a salary from the domain, which he rules, thereby potentially bringing personal treasuries and the finances (convert wealth) action more into play?

I would say no.

Think of it this way: Your domain is your birthright! Why should you remove resources from your birthright to pay yourself if you already get all of your expenses paid?

A corrupt regent who fear his rule is in danger might use convert wealth to steal from the domain.

Or a regent who wishes to grant a personalized gift, might convert a GB or fraction thereof to personal wealth in the form of some artwork he can gift instead of the GB.

The recipient of said presents may then use finances to add the GB value of the gift to their domains treasury.

GM's could give you a unique treasure from adventure actions as personal wealth rather than an amount of GB ready to add to your realms treasury.

I think there are plenty of opportunity to use finances(convert wealth) as it is.

[Dhoesone/FD_(Marco)]

In medieval and ancient ages differences between royal and ruler treasury were very few or even nonexistent...

It would be normal IMHO that a ruler could hide some riches of the domain for himself and his family, to use them in case of need (i.e. he must flee the domain for a revolt...).

But since in RoE we play a domain more than a regent I think to store away GBs in many cases would be useless.

[Yggdrasil (DM Andy)]

A certain amount of private expenditure from the "domain purse" is not merely possible but expected, it's when the regent overdoes it that you get issue (each domain drawing the line of acceptability in a different place).

One of the things I always find amusing in PBeMs is that nobody "wastes money", where is the construction of the massive townhouse, the great statues and art, the opulent tombs?  A lot of people earned money in the medieval world to spend it, not to invest it ;-)

I note that it isn't just rulers who occasionally have to flee either; some guild hostile takeovers can get nasty, and the in-fighting in some organisations could be brutal.  In BR of course most "GB" aren't portable, but even so a "secret stash" could exist in any domain in my view - it's a pity that the Conclave's 100 GB stash and its history was missed by most of you - it was beautiful. 

[Talinie & NIT/TD (Linde)]

A certain amount of private expenditure from the "domain purse" is not merely possible but expected, it's when the regent overdoes it that you get issue (each domain drawing the line of acceptability in a different place).

One of the things I always find amusing in PBeMs is that nobody "wastes money", where is the construction of the massive townhouse, the great statues and art, the opulent tombs?  A lot of people earned money in the medieval world to spend it, not to invest it ;-)

I note that it isn't just rulers who occasionally have to flee either; some guild hostile takeovers can get nasty, and the in-fighting in some organisations could be brutal.  In BR of course most "GB" aren't portable, but even so a "secret stash" could exist in any domain in my view - it's a pity that the Conclave's 100 GB stash and its history was missed by most of you - it was beautiful. 

The great statues, the art, the opulent tombs, the massive townhouse is IMO all found in the context of other actions. Rule holding could have a description of the erection of great buildings with no effect on domain play.

Agitate actions, festival (grant) actions and so on could be used to describe great statues and art.

If I at some point use GB effort on an action where it might be appropriate I could describe in a building, statue or other piece of art.

As I see it there is plenty of room to give your regent what he want, within reason, without "wasting money". The other characters in your domain is paid by your domain upkeep, and as such must have a personal treasury they can use as they see fit.

Please tell me if I am way off base.

[Ruideside/OM (RP)]

I don't think you are off base at all.

[Yggdrasil (DM Andy)]

In general a regent is only "of base" in their spending when floating face-down in the river with a trio of knives in their back and a former lieutenant bewailing the fact that guilt over their corruption and theft didn't make them jump sooner. 

Most personal stuff will be buried in court costs and actions - the fluff can cover all sorts.

[X-Points East]

OoC:

Should a regent generally receive a salary from the domain, which he rules, thereby potentially bringing personal treasuries and the finances (convert wealth) action more into play?

OoC:

Or should a regent perhaps receive a salary from the domain, which he rules, when possessing qualities (such as mastery), for which an able assistant might demand additional payment?

[Talinie & NIT/TD (Linde)]

OoC:

Should a regent generally receive a salary from the domain, which he rules, thereby potentially bringing personal treasuries and the finances (convert wealth) action more into play?

OoC:

Or should a regent perhaps receive a salary from the domain, which he rules, when possessing qualities (such as mastery), for which an able assistant might demand additional payment?

The story of why the eldest son did not take the throne:

The dying king:
"To my eldest son I leave the whole of the kingdom, may you watch over it and pass it strengthened to your son one day."

The eldest son:
"That's dandy dad. But since I am as great at playing the flute as I am, and ruling the kingdom will take up so much of my time, I will give myself 40.000gp each year to buy the stuff I could have bought with the profit from playing in the inns. You know I'm really really great at it so I think it will be fair."

The dying king:
"And to my youngest and only true son, I leave the whole of the kingdom! May he protect it from the influence of the stranger calling himself his brother"

[Yggdrasil (DM Andy)]

Or should a regent perhaps receive a salary from the domain, which he rules, when possessing qualities (such as mastery), for which an able assistant might demand additional payment?

With guilds you almost want to say "of course", but I suspect that the hereditary necessity of bloodlines means that most regents see the domains as "theirs" in a real sense - why pay yourself a salary?  In practice I suspect that it is best to leave the regent's personal wealth as subsumed in the domain and only fuss if there is an issue like a coup - in which case any legal status of the money is fairly irrelevant.

[X-Points East]

OoC:

Should a regent generally receive a salary from the domain, which he rules, thereby potentially bringing personal treasuries and the finances (convert wealth) action more into play?

OoC:

Hypothetical Possibility:

Relevant Levels	Regent Salary (per Season)
11+ Guild/Trade Levels	1 GB
11+ Law/Manor Levels	0.5 GB
11+ Temple Levels	0.25 GB

Note:  When two or three of the above (relevant-levels) conditions are met, the regent salary is the average of the two highest salaries, for which he is eligible.

[Stjordvik Traders/SH (Tristan)]

OoC:

Should a regent generally receive a salary from the domain, which he rules, thereby potentially bringing personal treasuries and the finances (convert wealth) action more into play?

OoC:

Hypothetical Possibility:

Relevant Levels	Regent Salary (per Season)
11+ Guild/Trade Levels	1 GB
11+ Law/Manor Levels	0.5 GB
11+ Temple Levels	0.25 GB

Note:  When two or three of the above (relevant-levels) conditions are met, the regent salary is the average of the two highest salaries, for which he is eligible.

I am assuming that the rationale is to add more value to the convert wealth action? If so rather than adding base incomes that mean players have the ability to convert personal wealth into GB and in agendas that have a corrupt and venal priest trying to siphon off money for his personal fortune, etc.

[Yggdrasil (DM Andy)]

To me, convert wealth was always aimed at the adventurer-regent, whether the play-prince who squandered the treasury on magic items and high-level hirelings to go and "play hero", or the Vos ruler of the impoverished tribe who hunted yeti's for pelts which they then traded for vital GB.

You could divide the domain income between the domain and the regent, either as noted or with the regent getting a share of the domain maintenance, but I'm not sure that I see the point - effectively you are either robbing Peter to pay Paul, or increasing domain income by making it an add-on.

With adventures generally taking a back-seat in ROE the action gets less use, one of the many things I need to discuss with Matt.