|
Post by toto on Feb 28, 2019 5:40:36 GMT
In the character selection map after I started a new game I saw that the Tyrell’s are no longer the lords of Mandervale but have been relegated to the rank of Ser of Thornton Hall(or something along those lines). True the Tyrell’s were mere stewards and this more accurately portrays their ranks but could it not have been done by adding a small county and make them playable. There are other playable landed knights such as the Yews,templetons,Santagar and others. Just feels like a shame the Tyrell’s aren’t playable anymore given that they played important roles in Reach politics and are barred from doing so due to their baron rank.
|
|
|
Post by rufff1 on Feb 28, 2019 7:49:47 GMT
Yeah, also them being "mere stewards" did not mean they didn't hold at least some lands, they married the daughter of a king, the shouldn't be high lords, but lords would definitely make sense
|
|
|
Post by rufff1 on Feb 28, 2019 10:24:29 GMT
Also hereditary high stewards were not low status castellans, the Stewarts/Stuart's of Scotland, who the Tyrells are probably based on, were some of the largest landowners in Scotland before they became kings, the position of Lord High Steward of England was first held by the earls of Leicester and has been held by various dukes for most of its history, the Grand Master of France (the French equivalent of high steward) was usually held by the Princes of Condé. Even in ASOIAF is clear that stewards are not just random landed knights, Erik Ironmaker, Steward of the Iron Islands for example. The notion that the Tyrell's were insignificant is Florent self aggrandisement, the WOIAF has the Tyrells serving to settle disputes, and serving as loyal stewards for a couple of thousand years for the Gardeners. The previous set up of them being lords not high lords, like the Florent was a good representation of how the florents were slightly more powerful in terms of land and men but the Tyrells had the ear of the Gardeners
|
|
|
Post by Paxter Redwyne on Feb 28, 2019 12:13:48 GMT
They were never stated to be lords before acquiring Reach. And who are they based off doesn't really matter. I think the problem is lack of free provinces for them.
|
|
|
Post by rufff1 on Feb 28, 2019 13:26:52 GMT
They were never stated to be lords before acquiring Reach. And who are they based off doesn't really matter. I think the problem is lack of free provinces for them. They married the daughter of gardener kings on 10 separate occasions and ruled the reach in all but name as regents and wartime castillans on multiple occasions according to WOIAF, suggesting a certain level of power and prestige, and even if you go with the argument that they didn't hold the title of Lord, in the game currently the Sers of New Barrel, Ser Davos, House Cassel of Kings Course, and the Sers of Ninestars all hold provinces despite being landed knights not lords. You could very easily give inchfield back to the Tyrells, like it was in 1.7, as the merryweathers also hold longtable and I don't think there's any evidence of them holding inchfield. Also if you didn't want to do that you could fairly easily give them a province in a different way - one easy fix is giving the Peakes an extra BARONY (a castle is a castle after all) and then making the Tyrells lords of Yelshire (currently held by the Peakes). Or do something similar with the Osgreys and replace one of their four counties with a barony and give the Tyrells a county. It just seems a shame to completely wall off the Tyrells in early bookmarks and submods, especially when so many reach houses have 2-3 provinces
|
|
|
Post by soulbourne on Feb 28, 2019 14:37:28 GMT
I do have one comment on this, not a lore argument, but a mechanic: The AI tends to place some value on actual rank so to encourage marriages and potentially even council positions(But less important) making them at least count level is a thing. I think that making them say a titular count while it would fix the issues presented, sets a bad precedent that may lead to further less founded suggestions however-though a titular duchy may be justified simply to nudge the AI direction if they do get a county. Titular duchies aren't exactly uncommon tools in base game anyways so I'd say it isn't even gaming mechanics to utilize them as opposed to the de jure.
|
|
|
Post by Paxter Redwyne on Feb 28, 2019 18:04:36 GMT
They were never stated to be lords before acquiring Reach. And who are they based off doesn't really matter. I think the problem is lack of free provinces for them. They married the daughter of gardener kings on 10 separate occasions and ruled the reach in all but name as regents and wartime castillans on multiple occasions according to WOIAF, suggesting a certain level of power and prestige, and even if you go with the argument that they didn't hold the title of Lord, in the game currently the Sers of New Barrel, Ser Davos, House Cassel of Kings Course, and the Sers of Ninestars all hold provinces despite being landed knights not lords. You could very easily give inchfield back to the Tyrells, like it was in 1.7, as the merryweathers also hold longtable and I don't think there's any evidence of them holding inchfield. Also if you didn't want to do that you could fairly easily give them a province in a different way - one easy fix is giving the Peakes an extra BARONY (a castle is a castle after all) and then making the Tyrells lords of Yelshire (currently held by the Peakes). Or do something similar with the Osgreys and replace one of their four counties with a barony and give the Tyrells a county. It just seems a shame to completely wall off the Tyrells in early bookmarks and submods, especially when so many reach houses have 2-3 provinces Reach has a problem with too many houses and too few provinces. Merryweathers were quite powerful once hence why they hold Inchfield. Personally, I would give them some duchy instead, but there are other people who have different opinion on the matter. Osgreys canonically once held four castles (no mention if Leafy Lake was one of those four) so there's that.
|
|
|
Post by rufff1 on Feb 28, 2019 18:16:01 GMT
They married the daughter of gardener kings on 10 separate occasions and ruled the reach in all but name as regents and wartime castillans on multiple occasions according to WOIAF, suggesting a certain level of power and prestige, and even if you go with the argument that they didn't hold the title of Lord, in the game currently the Sers of New Barrel, Ser Davos, House Cassel of Kings Course, and the Sers of Ninestars all hold provinces despite being landed knights not lords. You could very easily give inchfield back to the Tyrells, like it was in 1.7, as the merryweathers also hold longtable and I don't think there's any evidence of them holding inchfield. Also if you didn't want to do that you could fairly easily give them a province in a different way - one easy fix is giving the Peakes an extra BARONY (a castle is a castle after all) and then making the Tyrells lords of Yelshire (currently held by the Peakes). Or do something similar with the Osgreys and replace one of their four counties with a barony and give the Tyrells a county. It just seems a shame to completely wall off the Tyrells in early bookmarks and submods, especially when so many reach houses have 2-3 provinces Reach has a problem with too many houses and too few provinces. Merryweathers were quite powerful once hence why they hold Inchfield. Personally, I would give them some duchy instead, but there are other people who have different opinion on the matter. Osgreys canonically once held four castles (no mention if Leafy Lake was one of those four) so there's that. Yeah but my point on the castles for the Osgreys, and the Peakes, is that a barony is also a castle in the game, would the Osgreys holding 3 provinces and a barony in another province be less lore accurate? Not really imo, 3 provinces is still really powerful in game terms. As for the Merryweathers, I get that Inchfield is a way to show their decline of power, but like I said it just seems a bit absurd to make the Tyrells unplayable just to do that, as you suggest a duchy would work well - and is how it works for House Darry if memory serves, or you could have the buildings of Longtable decline after their fall from grace making them less wealthy and able to raise less men.
|
|
|
Post by Paxter Redwyne on Feb 28, 2019 21:56:14 GMT
Reach has a problem with too many houses and too few provinces. Merryweathers were quite powerful once hence why they hold Inchfield. Personally, I would give them some duchy instead, but there are other people who have different opinion on the matter. Osgreys canonically once held four castles (no mention if Leafy Lake was one of those four) so there's that. Yeah but my point on the castles for the Osgreys, and the Peakes, is that a barony is also a castle in the game, would the Osgreys holding 3 provinces and a barony in another province be less lore accurate? Not really imo, 3 provinces is still really powerful in game terms. As for the Merryweathers, I get that Inchfield is a way to show their decline of power, but like I said it just seems a bit absurd to make the Tyrells unplayable just to do that, as you suggest a duchy would work well - and is how it works for House Darry if memory serves, or you could have the buildings of Longtable decline after their fall from grace making them less wealthy and able to raise less men. I thought about making Osgrey's fourth castle a Leafy Lake, therefore freeing one county, but that probably would require further discussion on the topic. Inchfield by the way should be held by Inchfields all the time if all was well. And Tyrells lost county to Balls, not Inchfields. Since Balls are descending from Garth the Green, it's rather certain that they should be holding some province. Declining buildings doesn't really lower house's prestige and power much. I would really preffer if Merryweathers were dukes, but at the moment we haven't done anything about them, although we have some ideas and hopefully we will manage to do something eventually. Just to be clear, it wasn't my decision to reduce Tyrells to barons. I would be ok if they held county but since Reach is so overcrowded it seems tricky to do at the moment.
|
|
|
Post by toto on Mar 1, 2019 7:19:17 GMT
The lordship of bardshome would be good place for the tyrell,in my opinion. The cockshaws always become landless eventually,their lands are neat highgraden,and lorewise they dont play a major role. Relegating them to barons doesnt seem to be a major affront to anyone. And regarding hereditary council postions might there be a chance where we could somehow have a record who held what position,and that if a family held a postion consecutively there might a modifier to encourge the ai to choose them for that role or at least a opinion modifier.
|
|
|
Post by kuczaja on Mar 2, 2019 12:10:52 GMT
Westbrook would be far better since i cant recall any westbrook from books. But no promises, its something we need to discuss internally.
|
|