Should vassals be punished

[burninmizzou]

I was wondering why vassals can't be punished for not joining your wars. I mean if a vassal refused to come to the aid of their liege lord then during or after the war I would figure they would be in serious trouble . Even more so in the world of Ice and Fire. In game any action taken against them is counted as tyranny. If they refused you then they are the ones that take the hit.

 

[Maccius]

That's because of Crown's law, If you have the highest crown law vassal will not have the power to make war independently or join enemies, so that's the trick, and because Westeros is not Europe, Feudalism isn't that strong there, Lords are more independent

 

[burninmizzou]

I'm not saying they shouldn't have the choice but as a liege you should be able to punish them. In George Martins universe a vassal not responding to his Lieges call could end up with their family being whipped out.

 

[Maccius]

The Vale, Dorne didn't join the war of the kings and they didn't get punished

 

[Azaghal1502]

Only because the Throne has not the power to punish them. Even with dragons it was impossible to invade dorne, and the vale is like a huge fortress with the "bloody gate" as entrance. The only reason why the Vale surrendered to the Targaryen Invasion (after beating their fleet and killing Aegons Cousin in the naval battle) is that Visenya flew to the Eirie and took the child-lord on a flight in exchange for the surrender of the vale

Without dragons or a massive fleet, both unavailable to the throne, it's impossible to attack the vale, wich has a fully capable force of knights and foot soldiers as well as enough money for a long defensive war.
And Dorne has it's weather in favour of them.

I think if The Lannisters were capable of beating the Vale and Dorne, they totally would whipe them out^^

Greetings

 

[burninmizzou]

I was thinking more of High Lords and not Lord Paramonts. I mean if Blackwood decides not to join in a war that the rest of the RiverLands are fighting you would think that would mean trouble for them.

 

[Azaghal1502]

As long as he doesn't attack you, or join your enemie it'd be hard to blame him for staying out of the war. It's like the one Lord of the dornish marches (i think it does not matter^^) who keeps his army and sends one son to Renly, one to Stannis and one to the Lannisters to have an excuse for every possible outcome

 

[D Toccs]

You can punish vassals who don't help you if you like, but as you say you will incur tyranny. This is how it should be. For example Robb was completely justified in punishing Rickard Karstark, yet for all intents and purposes he incurred tyranny points for doing it.

 

[Specialist290]

You can punish vassals who don't help you if you like, but as you say you will incur tyranny. This is how it should be. For example Robb was completely justified in punishing Rickard Karstark, yet for all intents and purposes he incurred tyranny points for doing it.

Quoting for truth. Tyranny basically represents the fact that, whenever you take action against one of your vassals without an absolutely ironclad justification, each of them is thinking "That could be me next time!" even if they didn't particularly like the guy you're doing it to. There are all sorts of legitimate reasons why a vassal lord might choose to withhold his troops, chiefest among them being their own worries about the loyalty of their own vassals

 

[DarthNefarion]

Late Lord Frey did the same thing. Three times, in Robert's rebellion, when Lannisters invaded Riverlands again when Robb married Jayne. He was not punished for that. And that is probably not the only time such thing happened. If liege lord is not so popular among his subjects, they may stay aside when he goes to war

 

[ramblymanguthri]

when Robb married Jayne.

...
...I'll be in my bunk.