I'm assuming this recently changed since there's a firestorm about it on Dio's, so maybe spell out what the process is?

If it's a tie, the Emperor stays and the council is made anathema - or he as an option to do it? Or can you anathema someone offline? Do Immortals get a vote in this - or does an Immortal only vote to break ties?

>I'm assuming this recently changed since there's a firestorm
>about it on Dio's, so maybe spell out what the process is?
>
>If it's a tie, the Emperor stays and the council is made
>anathema - or he as an option to do it?

If it's a tie the Immortals are the tie-breakers.

>Or can you anathema someone offline?

Yes we can.

>Do Immortals get a vote in this - or does an
>Immortal only vote to break ties?

Immortals have votes in this, but are typically only used to break ties.

Haven't gotten home yet, but have seen the posts. It seems hugely unfair that no one was informed of how the voting system was changed after over a decade when were told the vote was called. I think it would have gone down diffrently if anyone knew you were now automatically Anathema'd if the vote failed. Also doesn't this new system basically screw anyone who wanted no part of it? In my case I voted for the person who I thought would keep the Emperor in power, and instead it completely screwed my character over.

>Haven't gotten home yet, but have seen the posts. It seems
>hugely unfair that no one was informed of how the voting
>system was changed after over a decade when were told the vote
>was called. I think it would have gone down diffrently if
>anyone knew you were now automatically Anathema'd if the vote
>failed. Also doesn't this new system basically screw anyone
>who wanted no part of it? In my case I voted for the person
>who I thought would keep the Emperor in power, and instead it
>completely screwed my character over.

There is no "automatically anathema'd" as part of this. It was manually done at the current Emperor's wishes. This isn't any different than it previously was. A failed coup is merely that, and the council paid the price.

If you didn't want to be a part of it, you didn't need to vote, or you could have voted for the sitting Emperor.

My appologizes then, I had heard otherwise. Thought it was part of the new automated vote process. In the note you sent it didn't mention voting for current Emperor as an option to be fair. Also I tried to wipe my vote later by doing a blank for vote emperor and it wouldn't let me. Not sure if that's something you want to add. Anyway thanks for clearing that up.

I could have sworn that was part of the original design I made, but the code did not reflect that.

You also have the option of actually roleplaying/communicating with the Immortals of Empire to do what you need, explain your motivation, clear your vote, etc.

For example, there is a coup.

A votes for Emperor.

B and C votes for D.
D votes for B.

What would happen? Will D win with 2 votes?
Does current Emperor voting for himself automatically (sounds logical, he should have a bonus for being Emperor already)?

Emperor doesn't get a vote during a coup.

But this makes usurpation way too easy and Emperor - very very unstable.
Is it possible to give one vote for Emperor always in such cases, to make this process not so easy?

Yes, latest events went terrible for the council. But now, when players are know how it works, it will be very, very easy to oust Emperor.

If Emperor will always have +1 vote (as I think sounds very logical), usurpers will need to coordinate better and will need 3+ votes, which is still very possible - but more risky.

...as is evident by the recent failure.

Keep in mind you can't vote for yourself.

So let's say you have War Master, Shadow Lord, and Dread Lord all getting together to say "Yes, the current Emperor needs to go."

They all send a note to Enlilth and Zulghinlour, who call the vote.

Even if War Master is "positive" that Shadow Lord and Dread Lord will vote for him, there's still that niggling feeling of doubt. What if Shadow Lord is just spying for the Emperor, and only the Shadow Lord holds true to his word and votes for WM? Then WM votes Shadow Lord, Shadow Lord votes Emperor (or doesn't vote), and you've got a three way tie (even without HP staying loyal to Emperor).

So then post-vote, Emperor rewards Shadow Lord and High Priest for being faithful - they get to keep their position, and perhaps he guarantees them that they'll never be demoted. Maybe he even gives them shinies and/or gold. War Master and Dread Lord get booted for betrayal.

To begin usurpation, all four councillors must send the notes?

For example, one of the councillors (A) is not participating (and maybe even doesn't know). Three others are sending notes to Zulg/Enlilth.

So, we have:

A have no idea what is going on.
B,C,D sent notes.

B,C voted fo D.
D voted for B (or for the fun - for A).

In this situation, three players ousted Emperor without one of the councillors even knowing it.

Correct?

>To begin usurpation, all four councillors must send the
>notes?

3/4 within the Council must send notes.

>For example, one of the councillors (A) is not participating
>(and maybe even doesn't know). Three others are sending notes
>to Zulg/Enlilth.
>
>So, we have:
>
>A have no idea what is going on.
>B,C,D sent notes.
>
>B,C voted fo D.
>D voted for B (or for the fun - for A).
>
>In this situation, three players ousted Emperor without one of
>the councillors even knowing it.
>
>Correct?

Yep.

nt

It will work with 100% success pretty easily with OOC contacts.

What is worse, it will require only 3 players with OOC connections to totally control Empire. Not 4, not 5 or more - only three.

Imo, too easy.

nt

I'll add.

If you got screwed in this then deal with it IC. The dynamics, and the whole "what's going on" thing are actually very cool when you sit back and really think about it. It may seem like the end of your awesome character, but maybe it's not!

> If you got screwed in this then deal with it IC.

Speaking of, check your in-game notes.