List of monarchs II
- Thread starter Badshah
- Start date
No new timelines. Allow the current ones to get to present day then once the last one is ended request a lock.
Okay then, we need to come up with some rules to save the mess that current lists have become.
True, I was upset when my fifteen year old had a legitimate heir. One should be that if people iotl still exist they should be used first.
My first proposition of "reform" is claiming turn before adding monarchs to the list to avoid situation where two posters are adding the list at the same time.
^^^That's a good idea
Two of my proposed Guidelines are;
Try to add some information about your monarch's reign (i.e what he/she did during the reign, how successful he/she are, what his/her claim to the throne is and what relation he/she is succeeded by.)
Try to keep reign lengths in the region of plausibility for the era they take place in(i.e a monarch who becomes king/queen at 50 is not going to rule for 40 years in any era except the modern and even then it's a stretch)
^^^I have suggested these as I have been guilty of doing of failing to do both of these things
Two of my proposed Guidelines are;
Try to add some information about your monarch's reign (i.e what he/she did during the reign, how successful he/she are, what his/her claim to the throne is and what relation he/she is succeeded by.)
Try to keep reign lengths in the region of plausibility for the era they take place in(i.e a monarch who becomes king/queen at 50 is not going to rule for 40 years in any era except the modern and even then it's a stretch)
^^^I have suggested these as I have been guilty of doing of failing to do both of these things
Last edited:
^^^ Also after female ruler, at least in medieval European lists dynasty should change name.
Lines of description should be kept short so we don't have paragraphs that make it unwieldy to read. It starts to get to the point that you might as well as write a collaborative timeline.
Maybe descriptions should be when they were born, how they came to the throne, and what they are known for. So 4 sentances at most?
I'm going to step in here and add my two cents, largely because I vacillate between playing and not based on the lists, but also seemingly, who is posting.
My suggestions for rules/reformations (some of which are mentioned already):
1. Claims are made, and then edited into updates.
2. Monarchs are logical and realistic, with footnoted details. I don't think, for example, if a European Monarch is a female it has to mean she's succeeded by a new dynasty, but if there is no dynasty change, there needs to be an explanation in the text (Habsburg marries Habsburg, succeeded by patrilineal cousin, etc.).
3. One list at a time. And no splitting lists off into multi-monarch scenarios. While I enjoyed that recent Roman one, it began to get absurd, especially with rando Jewish Indonesia.
4. Formatting: Date of Reign + Monarch + House are all contained within the color, All of the Above + Footnote are included in the bolded. For example (using parentheses instead of brackets):
(B)(color) 1848 - 1916: Franz Joseph (House of Habsburg-Lothringen) (/color)[1](/B)
If you are unsure of the previous color used, don't just use a similar color, copy & paste the above entry when editing and just reuse.
5. Without almost any exception, if there hasn't been Second/II, there can't be a First/I. The only examples I'm aware of off hand are Austrian Emperors, and that has to do with A-H, HRE, and Habsburgy stuff.
6. Players must have at least two posts between each of their postings.
My suggestions for rules/reformations (some of which are mentioned already):
1. Claims are made, and then edited into updates.
2. Monarchs are logical and realistic, with footnoted details. I don't think, for example, if a European Monarch is a female it has to mean she's succeeded by a new dynasty, but if there is no dynasty change, there needs to be an explanation in the text (Habsburg marries Habsburg, succeeded by patrilineal cousin, etc.).
3. One list at a time. And no splitting lists off into multi-monarch scenarios. While I enjoyed that recent Roman one, it began to get absurd, especially with rando Jewish Indonesia.
4. Formatting: Date of Reign + Monarch + House are all contained within the color, All of the Above + Footnote are included in the bolded. For example (using parentheses instead of brackets):
(B)(color) 1848 - 1916: Franz Joseph (House of Habsburg-Lothringen) (/color)[1](/B)
If you are unsure of the previous color used, don't just use a similar color, copy & paste the above entry when editing and just reuse.
5. Without almost any exception, if there hasn't been Second/II, there can't be a First/I. The only examples I'm aware of off hand are Austrian Emperors, and that has to do with A-H, HRE, and Habsburgy stuff.
6. Players must have at least two posts between each of their postings.
Last edited:
I generally agree with your points, but I think we need another restriction if bolded will be implied (I think that restriction is needed anyway). It's often assumed that list have to continue to present day even if started with Hammurabi or Tutankhamun, which is absurd in my opinion. So could we decide that list should be finished after span of, say 1000 years, so we will not be tied to list of Egypt's pharaons for million posts from the reign of Khufu to Ramses LXXIII?
That could be messy, how about allowing for the collapse of a country and then the conquers list replaces it?
Personally I'm ok with two or three lists, so long as they're related to each other.
I thoroughly concur.
7. Lists shall be limited to lengths of 1000 years or arrival at the present, which ever comes first.
My issue with multiple lists in the same TL is that I find them annoying to maintain. Eventually one out paces the others, or as was the case a while back with one of the Papal lists, there was a civil war, which created a multi-monarch list, which someone eventually had to come in and basically clean up.
---
Rereading things, I also want to raise an objection to always explicitly detailing who the successor is in the previous post. I suppose one could argue if one is looking for a challenge then not having control over a general aspect of the character is just that, but I prefer that it not be a rule, because I've found I occasionally will have a really interesting idea for a monarch or a succession crisis which is limited because the preceding post states Billy Bob XIX was succeeded by his third cousin, twice removed. I'm not saying we shouldn't do it at all, I just don't want it as a hard and fast rule.
I started a new thread List of monarchs III. The OP has spacing issues that I'm having trouble fixing, but it's readable and the rules are flexible enough (I hope) to let us be creative but still keep things formal.
Before this thread gets closed, I'd like to share the most hilarious and awesome cop-out I've seen to kill off a TL 
Do I earn a prize?Before this thread gets closed, I'd like to share the most hilarious and awesome cop-out I've seen to kill off a TL