falconhawk223
Member
- Oct 10, 2025
- 143
- 155
- 94
You might want to read the comment above youyou know what "serfdom" mean?
You might want to read the comment above youyou know what "serfdom" mean?
guess it really just comes down to not agreeing with the why then.So I don't how how differently the dev set up his fantasy world and maybe it works differently than in real life, but In real life that's how medieval marriages worked. In real life Matrilineal marriages were literally only about inheritance. It does not apply to anything else. Step children do not become part of the household wife's household, only the biological children between the husband and the tile owning wife would become a part of it. It's not like modern times were you marry someone and get their last name and that name would pass down to every kid you'd have after the name change. Even when in feudal times when land holding women married men their holdings didn't automatically become their husbands. Their husbands might manage their property but it was still technically their wives and if the couple divorced the wife would still have those territories while the husband would lose control of it, but that type of stuff generally didn't happen with matrilineal marriages in the first place and the two weren't equal and men in matrilineal marriages usually had more freedom than the reverse. Men in matrilineal marriages would still manage and have complete control over their own territory and would often be co rulers to their wife's territory.
The idea that the mc's other wives and other children would automatically become part of Sarah's house if he married Sarah matrilineally is completely false. They'd be completely unaffected by the marriage. They wouldnt be considered a branch or bastard either they'd just be considered part of the mc's original house and wouldn't inherit anything from Sarah. Matrilineal marriages were more like an alliance between households rather than taking a new family name like in modern times. Even if it was the adopted dad doesn't mind either so I don't see why it would be a problem anyway
You already pointed out that he's legally allowed to refuse so it wouldn't matter if he accepted this one or not. He doesn't suddenly revoke that privilege for all time by accepting once and the Queen still outranks him no matter what.
No,my problem was him being up in arms about a matrilineal marriage. I already said him being forced to marry is a reasonable thing to get upset about. I just said that I personally wouldn't have cared as long as it's someone I'm already interested in and not a total stranger. He already said though that the main reason why he's objecting is because it's matrilineal. That's the thing that annoys me and caused me to dislike him. Not the fact he said no, but because it seemed like his main issue was his ego
No, I meant that's not how medieval marriages work. A man in a matrilineal marriage wouldn't just become completely subservient to his wife.
No, they would be still be under his authority, but his own authority could be overridden at any moment by the Queen, then bt Sarah when she would take the crown.i don't understand how when his first wife's first join his family and fall under his head off the family then don't any more when the MC hands that over to a new one through marriage,his other wives somehow would end up no longer being under the same tree of authority but instead...they get their own? back to their pre-marriage setup?...
that would pretty much reduce them concubine's instead off wives.
In this setting, he does. Well, he still have some rights, of course, but Henri knows first hand how hard it could be to have them enforced when the one that he opposes is from the Royal family. After all, Athagan needed to intervene when Eloise tried to marry Karla's off, even though she had the right to choose her husband.No, I meant that's not how medieval marriages work. A man in a matrilineal marriage wouldn't just become completely subservient to his wife.
i read that. serfdom it's a whole system, it's the fundamental of the liege/vassal of medieval time. if you have sworn a loyalty bond to someone {usually as unlanded knight to a landed noble}, if he march to war against the crown you are legally obliged to support him, and not the crown. [the landed noble will be marked as traitor if he lost, but everyone with him for loyality bond will not]You might want to read the comment above you
yeah this is how i thought it would work for the VN,maybe i didn't phrase it like that directly.No, they would be still be under his authority, but his own authority could be overridden at any moment by the Queen, then by Sarah when she would take the crown.
No, I mean you literally misunderstood what I was saying and replied to a point that I wasn't actually talking about. I wasn't talking about serfs or the meme at alli read that. serfdom it's a whole system
Sarah having the ability to revoke it being an issue seems silly to me unless she has to be married to the mc in order to do so. Part of the problem for me anyway is that he's still going to be below the Queen no matter what anyway. Like I said maybe to you Henri seems justified but to me it just seems like he's being a big baby about it. I don't have a problem with the mc saying no I just don't agree with his reasoning at all for why he said no and his stubbornness about it annoyed me.yeah this is how i thought it would work for the VN,maybe i didn't phrase it like that directly.
basicly if there is a conflict or disagreement between him and Sariel(or later Sarah) he will have to yield or face consequences.
well its mainly due the different kind off authority.Sarah having the ability to revoke it being an issue seems silly to me unless she has to be married to the mc in order to do so. Part of the problem for me anyway is that he's still going to be below the Queen no matter what anyway. Like I said maybe to you Henri seems justified but to me it just seems like he's being a big baby about it. I don't have a problem with the mc saying no I just don't agree with his reasoning at all for why he said no and his stubbornness about it annoyed me.
Not really. You see, in Aetas the gouvernment is really decentralized. A noble has only two real duties to the crown: pay his taxes and provides his levies in case of war.Sarah having the ability to revoke it being an issue seems silly to me unless she has to be married to the mc in order to do so. Part of the problem for me anyway is that he's still going to be below the Queen no matter what anyway. Like I said maybe to you Henri seems justified but to me it just seems like he's being a big baby about it. I don't have a problem with the mc saying no I just don't agree with his reasoning at all for why he said no and his stubbornness about it annoyed me.
i know you're probably to busy to do so,but making a few codex pages explaining the lore & customs off the world enlighten us(mainly me of course) a bit more.Not really. You see, in Aetas the gouvernment is really decentralized. A noble has only two real duties to the crown: pay his taxes and provides his levies in case of war.
The crown duties are:
-To protect the realm.
-Managing the parts of it that are not under another landed nobles, like for example an estate without an heir, or some road that are the commercial arteries of the realm.
-Justice at the highest level. Between nobles, mostly.
-Making laws.
Of course, there is a lot of other lesser duties, but mostly it's military duty and managing feuds.
The thing is, what Sariel brought to the table, really? Money? He has enough. Power? He doesn't care, and don't need it. Sarah? A nice woman, but it's lot like he was besotted. The truth is that it would not have brought him anything that he values, and a lot of downsides. And he didn't like Sariel or her family at the time, and didn't trust them one bit. Why agree, then?
Need a scene of it winning a race and drop kicking the MC. Or at least drop kicking someoneThat grey horse is absolutely GolShi-coded
I suspect that someone who does HS clothing assets has an asymmetry fetish. Because I see a lot of these...OK been going back through part 3 from the start of it and there is only one thing that is kind of nails down a chalkboard for me. The fact that the new outfit has one long side on the right and is a short jacket on the left. I can not seem to get my mind to get past the inconsistency of the design for some reason.
it's what some people would call "fashion"OK been going back through part 3 from the start of it and there is only one thing that is kind of nails down a chalkboard for me. The fact that the new outfit has one long side on the right and is a short jacket on the left. I can not seem to get my mind to get past the inconsistency of the design for some reason.
it's what some people would call "fashion"
next outfit going to look like this:
View attachment 5613558
![]()
well naturally i tried finding a "appropriate" one