Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Sensei]

Interesting thoughts. My revisions/clarifications to the system:

-First off, the Judge just decides the sentence. If you have no judge (IE, he got killed by a carp) then there are no trials, which means the baron can just order whomever killed for not making bismuth sex toys. The judge will also be less harsh in his sentences if he's happy- so you have a pretty strong incentive to keep this guy happy and well, but you can ignore him if you want to.

-There is still a hammerer. The judge won't be Judge Dredd (unless you change his name). He just hands out the sentences.

-Fights to the death? I like it. Not sure if this should occur as a possible ruling by a judge or as a courtroom brawl. I don't see why they shouldn't be able to hire champions, but bewarned- your best champions might end up crippling eachother. For that reason I am wont to go without such a thing. Maybe champions (attorneys) for the arguing part?

-Yes, 10% could end up being a lot (and an even number). Maybe always 7? Which would make sense roleplaying-wise, because someone committing a crime in a small community is a much bigger deal than a theft charge or murder in a city.

-This would get used a lot more when crime is truly implemented, but in the current system it would mostly be a big buffer between the will of the Baron to have Urist hammered for not fulfilling a mandate, and that actually occurring.

[Saber Cherry]

Regarding the judge:

I like the idea of a noble that you really want to keep alive (and happy).  There should be an alternative to simply banning the hammerer's hammer, which is a bit unrealistic.  Even then, he can still permanently injure people with his bare hands.

It could also give an incentive to allowing people to make friends - a judge should give lighter sentences to people he likes.

There's also the possibility of it being an appointed position...  in which case the increasingly frustrated hammerer could eventually murder the judge for thwarting him.  Sort of a replaceable sacrificial anode.

[shadowclasper]

As somebody descended from lawyers and actually knowing the due process of law, I have to say this concept is a little flawed (and in such a way that presents lawyers as far too stereotypical, which is to say, inaccurate).

While "argue combat" is a neat idea, actually brawling is pretty stupid (of course... these ARE dwarfish lawyers... so whether it comes to blows or not is an entirely different question I guess)

More to the point, a defense Lawyer doesn't argue exclusively to get somebody off the hook (unless they deserve it), nor does the prosecution attempt to railroad the defendant. The point of BOTH lawyers is to present the cases of their clients in the best possible manner, both going for the sentence which is most appropriate, lawful, and fair. So one lawyer wouldn't be arguing to get his defendant off the hook, (except maybe in cases of work orders), but rather to make sure the hammerer isn't called in except in extreme cases. Ya kinda see what I'm getting at here? >_>;

[Iapetus]

While "argue combat" is a neat idea, actually brawling is pretty stupid (of course... these ARE dwarfish lawyers... so whether it comes to blows or not is an entirely different question I guess)

Plus, in medieval times, there really was a concept of trial by combat, where the accuser and the accused (or their champions) would fight a formal "dual" to determin guilt or innocence.

[shadowclasper]

Yes, but that's different from Lawyers. Lawyers and the Judge would determine if Trial by combat was an acceptable thing (actually, back then it might have just been the local justicar/shire reeve/priest, not sure). And even then there were pretty strict rules. Before that could be implemented you'd have to be able to declare certain items to be used only for certain things.

The trial would determine what kind of weapon, of what quality, and what materials were permitted to be used. Or perhaps just what kind of weapon. Then you have to make sure there are two weapons identical to each other in the fortress. The Justice system would also have to prevent champions from using the many artifact weapons they'd have accumulated, or something.

[Atarlost]

I wouldn't overcomplicate it with lawyers.  Just let dwarves fight back against the hammerer and consider justice served if they kill him. 

[Geb]

It would be a waste of an opportunity to show more of dwarf civilisation to just give them human justice systems, and simple would be good. The ideal should be a bizarrely semi-random system that might let criminals off, but which is still easy to implement in the game.

Combat was the first thing to come to mind. There are other possibilities however. Omens might be a good one. Have the sheriff, or whatever law-noble seems right, demand a room as a court, hold a meeting in there every time a criminal is accused, and have somebody haul an animal in.  Punishments or pardons are determined by a mixture of what the animal does, the weather. how many dwarfs are running around on fire, whether the accused has combed his beard....

[Sensei]

I still like the logic behind a judge and jury, since it involves a useful noble, and means that dwarves with friends are less likely to be punished. And if real crime is implemented, it's perfectly possible that an innocent dwarf would be charged (which would make the 'omen' system nothing short of hella annoying).

Maybe the Captain of the Guard could be the judge, giving you a motivation to appoint him.

Also, in the way of dwarvishness, maybe the judge should determine who gets what weapon? It'd be like "Urist probably stole from Medtob, but I'm not sure... so I'll give Medtob a hammer and Urist a spoon!"

[Halmie]

I still would love multiple systems of law which depend either on your civilization, your choice or another nobles choice...
Keep your judge happy and he wont set it to a crazy trial by ordeal.

Urist McPeasant is thrown into river full of carp.
Urist McPeasant somehow survives.
Urist McPeasant will be executed.

[Sensei]

Heh, that sounds like something they'd do to see if Urist was a witch.

[shadowform]

Wait, so when somebody commits a crime, a lawyer gets beaten to death rather than a productive member of society?

A+

And you gave me yet another awesome idea.

...And so it came to pass, that Urist McBrewer was found negligent in his duties, and sentenced to four hammerstrikes for failing to make the crystal glass objects as mandated by his rightful lord, Urist McNoble.  The hammerer nodded his head as he heard the sentenced, hefted his mighty hammer and left, towards the dining hall.

He opens the door and enters the great hall, finding his target at last, McBrewer huddled in a corner with his forty-four pet cats.  The crowd parts as the hammerer marches foward to dispense his sentence, save one:

He is Urist McBadass, Dwarven Attorney.  The two dwarves rush forward and a loud crash resounds through the dining hall as metal meets metal, the hammerer's first blow parried by the attorney's own shining mace.

Court is in session.

[Sensei]

I think that more specifically belongs in a rebellion thread.

[shadowform]

Not a rebellion.  The lawyer, of course, would be a noble in his own right, making demands for his room and mandating the construction of goods.  But unlike the baron/baronesss/tax collector, he'd be a noble that the player would actually WANT to keep happy.

[Atarlost]

Another thought.  Maybe nobles should be upset when lesser nobles order dwarves who are either their friends or that they consider valuable punished. 

Urist McMayor orders Smith McLegendary punished for failing to produce crystal goblets. 
Smith McLegendary has perished.
Urist McDuchess orders Urist McMayor punished for having the dwarf who crafted her favorite artifact floor grate killed. 
Urist McMayor has perished.
Queen Urist orders Urist McDuchess punished for having her friend killed. 
Urist McDuchess has perished. 
Duke McConsort has gone berserk. 
Urist Uristdotter has gone berserk.
...

[Lord Dakoth]

Urist McSomeone cancels Brew Drink: Jury Duty.
Urist McSomeone cancels Jury Duty: Drink.
Urist McSomeone cancels Drink: Job item lost or destroyed.
Urist McSomeone has died from thirst.

I think that if a jury was implemented, only dwarves with No Job should be called to testify.