Gilgon said:
Quote: I think it's completely implausible that kingdoms have control over the universal-banks, or else the leader of the Peacekeepers could just take away all the money of the darkies at their whim, and the leader of the Black Hand could take away all the money of the lighties at their whim.
You know, I do agree with that. Like I said, this was intended to be a suggestion for discussion in reply to another thread, rather than an idea in and of itself, but somehow I managed to post it top-level, and can't seem to remove it now.
It only represents part of my thoughts on the subject.
I'd like to see the whole system revamped, but that's a much larger change. Ideally, each country has its own banking system (because really, since when is the leadership of one country going to allow anothe country access to its banking?) , and the medieval leadership being what it is has the option of stripping anyone with local assets, the second they fall afoul of the law. Automatic win, as mentioned by Pushing40? No.
Yeah, it -does- allow people at war a 'loophole' of keeping their money in their own nation's bank, but this is a normal fact of war. Heck, the same can be applied to criminals. Accordingly, you get busted by someone you're at war with or have been attacking/robbing, you're going to lose the assets they have access to, everything they can get their hands on when they catch you, equipment, goods and otherwise. This isn't the 20th century.
It seems to me that after a certain point (re: stacking crimes), people should be considered an enemy of the state, and treated accordingly whether they turned themselves in or not. The 'reality' of the game is that execution & death are not a preventative technique.
|
