Question :
Two (or more) persons can be a “regent” simutaneously ?
Note, that some NPC domains have a “regent” composing of more than one person :Three Brother Mages , The Red Kings (Khinasi domain with eight or nine provincies and separate Red King for each, but law holdings are for “The Red Kings”), four thanes in Baruk Azhik… (they rule their provinces without than Graybeard, according to domain description in “Ruins of Empire”)
What if two players want to this type of rule ?
Gargamel
On Tue, 5 May 1998, [ISO-8859-2] Grzegorz Góral wrote:
> Question :
> Two (or more) persons can be a “regent” simutaneously ?
> Note, that some NPC domains have a “regent” composing of more than one
> person :Three Brother Mages , The Red Kings (Khinasi domain with eight
> or nine provincies and separate Red King for each, but law holdings are
> for “The Red Kings”), four thanes in Baruk Azhik… (they rule their
> provinces without than Graybeard, according to domain description in
> “Ruins of Empire”)
The two states you mention are examples of complicated vassalage
and division-of-labor arrangements, but I do not think there is an
instance (see below) of a single holding being in “the realm” of
more than one individual. The Three Brothers are a more troublesome case,
and even the detailed description of them in the “Sword of Roele”
adventure does not help; I would argue for bringing them in line with the
others by splitting up the sources among them (particularly useful in that
if each holds two of their six sources, they pay no GB maintenance cost)
and possibly instituting vassalage arrangements.
Aftane has twelve provinces, extensive holdings of all types, and
seven rulers, each of whom has a certain sphere of control. The guilds,
temples, and sources are all split up to three named and well-described
regents, two of whom also have law holdings. A fourth is described in the
NPCs section of “Cities of the Sun”, in which it states that he, “the
spokesman for the Red Kings”, controls no provinces, but only two specific
law holdings; he appears to be the “top man” for public purposes, as the
others are each his vassals to the tune of 2 RP per domain turn. My
approach in fleshing out this country for an NPC realm was to name the
other three Red Kings (of whom it is said only that they are distributed
one per city-state), and identify which of them held each province and law
holding. I claim that the law held by neither the Brotherhood of Khet nor
the Chosen of Khirdai is listed in the plural only to simulate the secrecy
about themselves practiced by the Red Kings: exactly who does what is not
public knowledge, so it is not printed for players to read.
Baruk-Azhik is similar but less complicated: Grimm Greybeard holds
all law and one province, and four other regents hold one province each.
The subordinate thanes had better do what Greybeard tells them, however,
since they need him to collect taxes effectively, and he can contest the
provinces away from them if the loyalty drops too low.
> What if two players want to this type of rule ?
I say make them specify exactly who owns what holdings, but
announce to the world that they are partners.
=?ISO-8859-2?Q?Grzegorz_G=F3ral?= wrote:
>
> Question :
> Two (or more) persons can be a “regent” simutaneously ?
> Note, that some NPC domains have a “regent” composing of more than one person :Three Brother Mages , The Red Kings (Khinasi domain with eight or nine provincies and separate Red King for each, but law holdings are for “The Red Kings”), four thanes in Baruk Azhik… (they rule their provinces without than Graybeard, according to domain description in “Ruins of Empire”)
> What if two players want to this type of rule ?
>
> Gargamel
This is a very good question, since the Magic Section of the BROCP is
being forced to consider this very thing! Specifically, how do the 10
wizards of the Council of the College of Sorcery control that 0 level
source holding in the IC?
Can anyone help Gargamel and the BROCP Magic team? (especially you TSR
dudes, hint hint) 
Darren
The Three Brothers are a more troublesome case,
and even the detailed description of them in the “Sword of Roele”
adventure does not help; I would argue for bringing them in line with the
others by splitting up the sources among them (particularly useful in that
if each holds two of their six sources, they pay no GB maintenance cost)
and possibly instituting vassalage arrangements
No maintenance is paid for sources (pg 44 of the BR Rulebook).
The Three Brothers are a more troublesome case,
and even the detailed description of them in the “Sword of Roele”
adventure does not help; I would argue for bringing them in line
with the
others by splitting up the sources among them (particularly useful
in that
if each holds two of their six sources, they pay no GB maintenance
cost)
and possibly instituting vassalage arrangements
No maintenance is paid for sources (pg 44 of the BR Rulebook).