oni-ni-kanabo
10-20-2011, 01:05 AM
I'm sure this is not a new idea and occasionally we read from Greg re: a Book of Barons, but in its absence I'm currently of a mind to develop a simple management system that allows for players to take on the tasks of administration as Barons, Earls, and what-have-you. Basically, I want the option of players growing more powerful while giving them a full economy to play with. Now obviously this isn't trying to be an exhaustive model of feudal society and economics, but a framework that gets the ball rolling.
Manorial Level
There's a few key things to consider. First, we need to look at a single manor, the center piece of the Pendragon economy - the workings of which we should know quite well. The typical manor keeps the knight at an ordinary level of maintenance, but leaves £2 extra for an unmarried one (who could use this as the means to keep himself at a rich level of maintenance). The questions that follow concerning the lordly side of things are 1) how much does a typical enfeoffed manor give £ to the tenant-in-chief (and nobles upward in the hierarchy, up to but not restricted to Kings) and 2) how much does a demesne manor provide in £?
Part of the answer to the first question can be found in the Book of the Manor, where £3 going to the liege is listed as part of the hidden expenses of the Pendragon economy. The real question becomes how much does a lord, say an Earl, owe to the King for each manor. How much of the £3 is sent onward and up the feudal hierarchy? One can assume the King takes the lion's share, so let's say £2 gets sent to the King and £1 becomes profit for the lord from each enfeoffed manor. It could be the other way around (with the lord keeping £2 and sending £1 to the King), though.
The answer to the second question has sometimes been forwarded as being £8. How would this be justified? First of all, the lord would keep the entire £6 income that would normally pay for the knight's lifestyle as profit. Where does the extra £2 come from? A part of the hidden costs includes the annual Christmas gifting between liege and vassal. This give and take amounts to a further profit of £1 for the liege which is normally included in the hidden manorial economy. Now, though lords would have their own gifting expenses (which we will consider when looking at the lordly level in greater depth), on the manorial level this is waived for a demesne manor. This gives us a current total of £7 profit. Previously we detailed that another part of the hidden expenses are payments owed to the liege. The amount in total is established by Book of the Manor as £3 and earlier we decided that £2 of that is owed to the King, leaving £1 in further profit. That comes nicely around to £8 profit for a demesne manor.
For the King himself, a demesne manor would provide £10 in profit. A nice round number.
Curious Case of the Banneret
Let's consider a Banneret's role in the hierarchy for a moment. Bannerets usually have at least some demesne manors, which give them the £8 in profit. They too send £2 onward to their liege for each such manor. That introduces a little irregularity in our calculations. The entire £2 would have to go to the King to fulfill the payments as described earlier, leaving nothing for the Banneret's Earl. Also note that any vassals the Banneret would have would pay the full £3 upward with the Banneret, the Earl and the King contending for the coin. I'm just raising this up as a concern and potential irregularity, which might need a specific addressal.
An easy answer to account fot this might be that in general a lord creating a Banneret seeks to ease their tax burden and foregoes the £1 owed to him in favor of creating a stronger vassal. It does smack of almost too much magnanimous fair-mindedness, but it would make the system work evenly (and provide a further financial incentive against creating too many Bannerets).
An Earldom
This is where it gets problematic of course and where we need to tread new ground, but first let's look what we already know.
The standard earldom has 100 manors, 75 knights and 100 footmen (assuming Salisbury equals a standard earldom for amount of footmen).
According to the main book there is a lifestyle requirement for Barons, Earls and Dukes. Secondly, the main book gives a rough cost for the upkeep of the lord's family and retainers. For an Earl, the costs involved are £15 (for the lifestyle) and £84 (for family and retainers). That gives a total of £99.
In an earlier discussion on the forums Greg presented that the average income of an earldom is about £500 with expenses of about £480, resulting in £20 extra cash for our standard size Earl. It was suggested that two thirds of the £500 should be demesne income. That's £333 divided by £8 (demesne manor income as established previously), needing around 42 demesne manors to accomplish.
That seems like quite a lot of demesne manors for that standard earldom of 100 manors, but perhaps not an unfeasible amount. That would have to mean that 58 manors would provide 75 knights (minus the Household knights).
Considering that Bannerets provide knights for the muster at an effectiveness of less than 1 manor = 1 knight, this does seem a bit problematic. Without counting any Bannerets (perhaps their knights are not numbered in the 75 allotted to a standard earldom) and even assuming 1 manor = 1 knight on all the rest of the manors, the Earl would have to have 17 household knights.
So, our slightly problematic example Earldom would be composed of thusly:
42 demesne manors, providing £336 income to the Earl
58 enfeoffed manors, providing £174 income to the Earl
With 100 total manors from which £200 is owed to the King
58 vassal knights, costing effectively nothing (gifting costs and incomes embedded into manorial economy)
17 household knights, costing £68 annually
100 footmen, costing £100 annually
Superlative lifestyle
£84 costs for family and retainers
Total Income: £510
Total Costs: £467
What is missing? Well, at least the Earl's annual gift to the King. That'd have to be somewhere around £10, if not more. Any tournaments he'd sponsor as well, but presumably those would come out of extra cash anyway. This all brings the numbers perilously close to the approximates which Greg has presented previously.
...
I could go on, but this is getting pretty verbose so I'll open up the opportunity for people to voice their opinions and insights. Hopefully there is meat in there for people to sink their teeth into, even though it's pretty much an overview right now. All criticism, comments and ideas are most welcome!
Manorial Level
There's a few key things to consider. First, we need to look at a single manor, the center piece of the Pendragon economy - the workings of which we should know quite well. The typical manor keeps the knight at an ordinary level of maintenance, but leaves £2 extra for an unmarried one (who could use this as the means to keep himself at a rich level of maintenance). The questions that follow concerning the lordly side of things are 1) how much does a typical enfeoffed manor give £ to the tenant-in-chief (and nobles upward in the hierarchy, up to but not restricted to Kings) and 2) how much does a demesne manor provide in £?
Part of the answer to the first question can be found in the Book of the Manor, where £3 going to the liege is listed as part of the hidden expenses of the Pendragon economy. The real question becomes how much does a lord, say an Earl, owe to the King for each manor. How much of the £3 is sent onward and up the feudal hierarchy? One can assume the King takes the lion's share, so let's say £2 gets sent to the King and £1 becomes profit for the lord from each enfeoffed manor. It could be the other way around (with the lord keeping £2 and sending £1 to the King), though.
The answer to the second question has sometimes been forwarded as being £8. How would this be justified? First of all, the lord would keep the entire £6 income that would normally pay for the knight's lifestyle as profit. Where does the extra £2 come from? A part of the hidden costs includes the annual Christmas gifting between liege and vassal. This give and take amounts to a further profit of £1 for the liege which is normally included in the hidden manorial economy. Now, though lords would have their own gifting expenses (which we will consider when looking at the lordly level in greater depth), on the manorial level this is waived for a demesne manor. This gives us a current total of £7 profit. Previously we detailed that another part of the hidden expenses are payments owed to the liege. The amount in total is established by Book of the Manor as £3 and earlier we decided that £2 of that is owed to the King, leaving £1 in further profit. That comes nicely around to £8 profit for a demesne manor.
For the King himself, a demesne manor would provide £10 in profit. A nice round number.
Curious Case of the Banneret
Let's consider a Banneret's role in the hierarchy for a moment. Bannerets usually have at least some demesne manors, which give them the £8 in profit. They too send £2 onward to their liege for each such manor. That introduces a little irregularity in our calculations. The entire £2 would have to go to the King to fulfill the payments as described earlier, leaving nothing for the Banneret's Earl. Also note that any vassals the Banneret would have would pay the full £3 upward with the Banneret, the Earl and the King contending for the coin. I'm just raising this up as a concern and potential irregularity, which might need a specific addressal.
An easy answer to account fot this might be that in general a lord creating a Banneret seeks to ease their tax burden and foregoes the £1 owed to him in favor of creating a stronger vassal. It does smack of almost too much magnanimous fair-mindedness, but it would make the system work evenly (and provide a further financial incentive against creating too many Bannerets).
An Earldom
This is where it gets problematic of course and where we need to tread new ground, but first let's look what we already know.
The standard earldom has 100 manors, 75 knights and 100 footmen (assuming Salisbury equals a standard earldom for amount of footmen).
According to the main book there is a lifestyle requirement for Barons, Earls and Dukes. Secondly, the main book gives a rough cost for the upkeep of the lord's family and retainers. For an Earl, the costs involved are £15 (for the lifestyle) and £84 (for family and retainers). That gives a total of £99.
In an earlier discussion on the forums Greg presented that the average income of an earldom is about £500 with expenses of about £480, resulting in £20 extra cash for our standard size Earl. It was suggested that two thirds of the £500 should be demesne income. That's £333 divided by £8 (demesne manor income as established previously), needing around 42 demesne manors to accomplish.
That seems like quite a lot of demesne manors for that standard earldom of 100 manors, but perhaps not an unfeasible amount. That would have to mean that 58 manors would provide 75 knights (minus the Household knights).
Considering that Bannerets provide knights for the muster at an effectiveness of less than 1 manor = 1 knight, this does seem a bit problematic. Without counting any Bannerets (perhaps their knights are not numbered in the 75 allotted to a standard earldom) and even assuming 1 manor = 1 knight on all the rest of the manors, the Earl would have to have 17 household knights.
So, our slightly problematic example Earldom would be composed of thusly:
42 demesne manors, providing £336 income to the Earl
58 enfeoffed manors, providing £174 income to the Earl
With 100 total manors from which £200 is owed to the King
58 vassal knights, costing effectively nothing (gifting costs and incomes embedded into manorial economy)
17 household knights, costing £68 annually
100 footmen, costing £100 annually
Superlative lifestyle
£84 costs for family and retainers
Total Income: £510
Total Costs: £467
What is missing? Well, at least the Earl's annual gift to the King. That'd have to be somewhere around £10, if not more. Any tournaments he'd sponsor as well, but presumably those would come out of extra cash anyway. This all brings the numbers perilously close to the approximates which Greg has presented previously.
...
I could go on, but this is getting pretty verbose so I'll open up the opportunity for people to voice their opinions and insights. Hopefully there is meat in there for people to sink their teeth into, even though it's pretty much an overview right now. All criticism, comments and ideas are most welcome!