The Nexerus said
Siege weapons.
Let me explain the part I planned to say but I had to get back to work from my job.
OBVIOUSLY if there are siege weapons, you can just sit far away and fire off rounds until you destroy the wall and then invade, unless the other party also has siege weapons. Siege weapons within walls are much more protected than a bunch all lined in a close knit row in the open field. Castle Siege weapon missing; engineers and soldiers scatter for cover, or the flying debris hits and injures or kills them. Open field siege weapons missing; you hit the wall or blatantly missed, fire more rounds because the soldiers will hold behind the wall because it is their cover, especially if you want to destroy a wall.
Also, it doesn't really look well for offensive siege weapons when archers can continuously fire off volley's of flaming arrows into open ground on wood-made constructs and (high gravity + velocity = painful strike) soldiers. Yeah, you can do the same to a castle. The difference is some siege weapons can use a slit in a wall, and what's your defense for yours, a shield wall? You didn't make your case any better.
True, I am trying to make myself more threatening, but my point is, well it's obvious. Facts are facts and last I checked this was a realistic roleplay. You can never be too prepared, even when you're overly prepared for nothing.
Flooby Badoop said
It isn't required to have a full army to protect a fief, so that's good. If there's anything in the rules that imply otherwise, I shall have them removed.As for the alcohol ban, you do what you wish in your kingdom.As for not being with the Overlord, it's tough to say whether you're in rebellion or not, since no demands have been placed on you. And if there's nothing to rebel against, you're not technically in rebellion.
There you go. I can hate my government all I want, but I will still more than likely pay my taxes and follow the just laws.
(Created a new page, gah, will just pull my post over here.
