COMMUNITY - FORUMS - GENERAL DISCUSSION
Owning land vs Ruling land

From what I understand Owning and Ruling land are each their own thing.

A ruler sets laws and enforcement, specifies a direction of progression, and collects taxes for the lands they rule.

An owner builds, leases, rents and otherwise uses the land they own and pays taxes for it.

So a farmer may own 20 parcels of land but not be a mayor. On the other side, being a mayor does not mean you own all the land in the town you preside over and you can't just do whatever you want with it.

I bring this up because I keep hearing about how Counts will abuse the Desk of their office to just take all the unclaimed land in their County for their own. If what I said above is true, then as land owners, they would be responsible for paying taxes on that land to their superiors. That's going to add up really fast.


1/16/2018 4:39:43 AM #31

Posted By Ravenlute at 4:02 PM - Mon Jan 15 2018

Posted By Gunghoe at 01:45 AM - Mon Jan 15 2018

you can't have it both ways. You either own it and are free to do with land what you want. Free of taxation. Free of any laws within your property. Or if there is laws, and taxation, then you don't own anything. Anything that you lose any little control over means you don't own it.

Okay, look at the title of this thread. You are trying to say that owning and ruling are the same. They are not.

You can own a carriage, destroy it or build additions to it, but you can not simply do anything you want with it because you own it. You cannot simply ride it through the royalties castle, run over people, kidnap someone and store them in your carriage, light it on fire and roll it into a store; because doing so is against some rule or law and there is a penalty for breaking that.

Owning does not equal freedom to do whatever. It is freedom to do what you want within the binding of the law. So, yes, you can mine in the middle of town, unless there is a law that says otherwise, such as a residential zoning.

On the other side of that, while a Mayor may be able to tell you what you are allowed to do with the land you own, they themselves will not be able to just start building on it or do anything with it.

I specifically was talking about land, And if you don't have the freedom to do what ever you want with it, you don't own the land.

In real life there is protections, however you still don't own your property. You can't own something that you don't have FULL control over. it's a mater of semantics, The counties land is the counties land, Your lease just gives you land rights.

1/17/2018 1:02:10 AM #32

The way I'm understanding it, you have your overlord, Baron in his Barony, Duke in his Duchy, County in his county, whatever. As the overseer of these lands, I want to decide where to put the towns and villages. So I allot twenty lots next to the ocean to create a village for trade and fishing. I allot twenty lots for a village nestled in the mountains to handle mining. I allot twenty lots next to the southern forest for wood and hunting. I then appoint mayors to handle these towns. The mayors see to zoning the lots into residential and industrial. As the town grows, they'll ask for additional lots, I'd inspect them, see that they're doing well, and grant those lots to be zoned by the mayor and purchased by the players. If the town sucks, I can dismiss the mayor and appoint someone else to manage the town. In this way, I get villages where I need them, while avoiding urban sprawl ala Ultima Online. Plus, I don't need to micromanage. I have people for that.


1/17/2018 4:58:58 AM #33

Posted By Behumat at 5:02 PM - Tue Jan 16 2018

The way I'm understanding it, you have your overlord, Baron in his Barony, Duke in his Duchy, County in his county, whatever. As the overseer of these lands, I want to decide where to put the towns and villages. So I allot twenty lots next to the ocean to create a village for trade and fishing. I allot twenty lots for a village nestled in the mountains to handle mining. I allot twenty lots next to the southern forest for wood and hunting. I then appoint mayors to handle these towns. The mayors see to zoning the lots into residential and industrial. As the town grows, they'll ask for additional lots, I'd inspect them, see that they're doing well, and grant those lots to be zoned by the mayor and purchased by the players. If the town sucks, I can dismiss the mayor and appoint someone else to manage the town. In this way, I get villages where I need them, while avoiding urban sprawl ala Ultima Online. Plus, I don't need to micromanage. I have people for that.

Forgetting NPC's. The world will start off already populated with cities, towns, and villages run and managed by NPC's. Players will jump in and replace some of them.

Beyond that, it requires a certain amount of people and parcels to start a village and set requirements to expand to a town level, at which they notify their (Count?) and become official. Now you could attempt to do as you say and purchase a certain amount of land then send some people over to start a village but you'll still have those NPC ones to contend with.