But why even bother with that when we can just have something a lot more clear?

Actually, not quite.

It's, "You have appointed who? Sorry, no. Pick someone else or we will remove you from being aligned to us. In the meantime, that person still has Court/Council/Circle privileges."

I personally like it - it's a large family expressing influence. Alternately (and there's nothing from stopping them!), what's the difference between this and them forcing themselves into a CL position? Or a GM position? Or both and more?

A great house is a -lot- of work (Let's look at the d'Murani - Family Honour: Respected (154)), especially if they want a council seat. It's, I think, 4,500 honour? Minimum. Only one house per org, and it's the house with the highest honour with a minimum threshold of 45k honour.

Seems pretty fair to me. I think a lot of you are undervaluing the effort required, and only a family really dedicated to the cause are going to manage it - and I rather doubt they're going to put someone who's a complete doof in the position. Just my opinion, though. It'll be fun to see it play out!

Not to mention, why do you need hard coded mechanics to make a rule in an org that says "no GH can appoint without agreement of the Ruling Council. Doing so will result in said GH being immediately revoked from alignment."

RP does not have to constantly be determined by mechanics.

Well, at least Glomdoring doesn't have to worry about Great House crap, because Magnagora will probably keep it's hold on the house for a long time.

Just until another House comes up anyways.

Because even with said rule, it can still be done without any support of the choice whatsoever (or a lone voice, just like aligning the family in the first place). The person isn't even voted on by the family, unlike a GM election.

I'm actually kind of surprised that, with as many examples as we have of players using what they're given far beyond what they were intended to do, to the point that it needs to get "heavily modified" to remove the abuse potential, that this one's slipping through. It's not like it should be any more difficult than a "change the Commune/City governing style" request, or "appoint a Minister," and will most likely end up saving a fair bit of headache.

Yeah, it should only require one or two members to do it, but it'll definitely get rid of the potential for abuse.

Isn't it that only the head of the family can be appointed to the ruling council? If that's the case, which it should be, then that actually is an elected position.

No. The head of the family gets to appoint anyone in the family who is a member of that city. Entirely up to the head's discretion.

No, the family head can appoint any member.

EDIT: Xenthos, go join the Nekotai, you evil ninja.

OK, this appointing discussion is just silly for me. What's so wrong about appointing someone? What's bad about that?

FAMILY TREE DEKOVEN

You tell me

*********************************************
Dishonoured Seat: Varrin
Family Patron: (Nobody)
Family Domain: (None)
Family Honour: Dishonourable (-21)

I believe Revan is upset that Dekoven is very far from ever having a council position. He's so upset, he's attempting to have it so that they permanently hold every council position in Magnagora.

Just so he can be close to them.

I can just laugh at Celest/Seren, I'm sorry.

Stupid killing someone for reincarnation... stupid two people getting divorced...

Please make prestige wins and culture stuff count for honour! Since sparring (which is combat) already does.

Family honour shouldn't go down if someone is killed in wildnodes or village influencing.

Yeah...I don't see the point of this particular feature at all. All this is going to do is make sure people enemy for raids, domoths, villages, wildnodes and, well, anything else where you would normally just deal with it.

And how often are we supposed to gain power through people holding elected positions? We're also seeing hardly anything in regards to gaining honour through offerings.