"Classless" Regency Income System

[Birthright-L]

Hello,

I think I posted this idea some time ago in this list. It was in draft state, so now goes the full idea (with some playtest): this system is for taking out regency from character classes, and instead, giving it to a new thing called "Regency Marks".

When a player creates a regent, he starts with 30 Regent Design Points. He can use these points to buy his bloodline (so you don´t roll it anymore (this is from my game: my players don´t like rolling bloodline strength)) and regency marks. Regency marks determine where do you collect regeny from, and modify some other things (like the cost of levels when you design a realm, some actions,...). If you like to roll bloodlines, give your players 20 Regent Design Points instead of 30 (the system asumes that a normal character will have a bloodline strength of 20).

If you don´t like to design your realms using the rules in the rulebook, give all major "basic marks" 2/3 level income instead of 1/2. Extra marks are probably a little harder to change.

The basic cost when you design a realm is the one stated in the rulebook except:

- 1 level of everything (except fortification) costs 3 Domain Design Points (unless you have a mark for it).
- 1 trade route = 3 Domain Design Points (same as above).
- 1 Domain Design Point = 5 GB in armies = 5 GB in treasury (same again)

An example: Barlak the fighter decides he will play a Maximus (Gladiator) type of guy. He buys "Military Mark, Major", "Warlord, Mark, Major", "Law Mark, Major" and "Popular Mark, Minor". He has used up 5+3+5+1 = 14 points. He decides Barlak comes from an important line of scions, using his other 16 points to get a bloodline strength of 32.

He earns regency from his military units (their maintenance in gb is his income in rp), from his law (1/2 level of law in rp), for being highly popular (1 rp for every province in high loyalty) and extra points when he is in war (+20% RP). He also sees that he can declare war as a free action once per turn (more than enough for him).

Seing that, he decides he is not going to have many holdings: he will be probably a lieutenant for another character (he can be a perfect frontier general, asuming the protection of border provinces). We let Barlak with building his kindom...

Well, I´ll post the marks now. Caution: the post is quite long. Comments would be highly appreciated.

/********** SPECIAL MARKS **********/

/******* Bloodline Strength ********/
The power of your bloodline.

1 Regent Design Point = +2 Bloodline Strength

/******* Domain Mark *******/
Your family has the nack to develop the true potential of a domain.

1 Regent Design Point = +3 Domain Design Points

/*********** BASIC MARKS **********/

/************ Land Mark ***********/
Having lands is related to your personal power. Your regency increases with the size of your kingdom.

Tainted (Cost 1 Point)
2 Domain Design Points = 1 Population Level
Regency Income = Population Level / 4 (rounded down)

Minor (Cost 3 Points)
2 Domain Design Points = 1 Population Level
Regency Income = Population Level / 3 (rounded up)

Major (Cost 6 Points)
1 Domain Design Point = 1 Population Level
Regency Income = Population Level / 2 (rounded up)

Great (Cost 10 Points)
1 Domain Design Point = 1 Population Level
Regency Income = Population Level

/************ Law Mark ************/
Your blood reacts to law. Wielding the power of ordering other people lives gives you strength and ability to help your cause further.

Tainted (Cost 1 Point)
2 Domain Design Points = 1 Law Level
Regency Income = Law Level / 4 (rounded down)

Minor (Cost 2 Points)
2 Domain Design Points = 1 Law Level
Regency Income = Law Level / 3 (rounded up)

Major (Cost 5 Points)
1 Domain Design Point = 1 Law Level
Regency Income = Law Level / 2 (rounded up)

Great (Cost 7 Points)
1 Domain Design Point = 1 Law Level
Regency Income = Law Level

/************ Guild Mark ***********/
Comerce, trading, resources,... Your regency relates to them as they relate to the welfare and prosperity of a province.

Tainted (Cost 1 Point)
2 Domain Design Points = 1 Guild Level
Regency Income = Guild Level / 4 (rounded down)

Minor (Cost 2 Points)
2 Domain Design Points = 1 Guild Level
Regency Income = Guild Level / 3 (rounded up)

Major (Cost 5 Points)
1 Domain Design Point = 1 Guild Level
Regency Income = Guild Level / 2 (rounded up)

Great (Cost 7 Points)
1 Domain Design Point = 1 Guild Level
Regency Income = Guild Level

/*********** Temple Mark ***********/
Having the faith of other people centered in you, acting as a nexus between it and your god makes your regency stronger. When they believe in him, they believe in you.

Tainted (Cost 1 Point)
2 Domain Design Points = 1 Temple Level
Regency Income = Temple Level / 4 (rounded down)

Minor (Cost 2 Points)
2 Domain Design Points = 1 Temple Level
Regency Income = Temple Level / 3 (rounded up)

Major (Cost 5 Points)
1 Domain Design Point = 1 Temple Level
Regency Income = Temple Level / 2 (rounded up)

Great (Cost 7 Points)
1 Domain Design Point = 1 Temple Level
Regency Income = Temple Level

/*********** Source Mark ***********/
The ancient power of magic is related to bloodline. But in your case, it´s nearly united: they wax and wane together.

Tainted (Cost 1 Point)
2 Domain Design Points = 1 Source Level
Regency Income = Source Level / 4 (rounded down)

Minor (Cost 2 Points)
2 Domain Design Point = 1 Source Level
Regency Income = Source Level / 3 (rounded up)

Major (Cost 5 Points)
1 Domain Design Points = 1 Source Level
Regency Income = Source Level / 2 (rounded up)

Great (Cost 7 Points)
1 Domain Design Point = 1 Source Level
Regency Income = Source Level


/*********** EXTRA MARKS **********/

/********** Warlord Mark **********/
The clash of steel, the cries of battle, men rallying their banners and entering the fight. That´s what gives you power.

Minor (Cost 1 Point)
+10% Regency during wars

Major (Cost 3 Points)
Declare War as a free action once per turn
+20% Regency during wars

/********* Sorcerer Mark **********/
You bear the mark of a true wizard, and you can cast spells easily and in a more effective way than other spellcasters.

Minor (Cost 1 Point)
Arcane Realm Spells cost -10% regency

Major (Cost 3 Points)
Cast Arcane Realm Spell as a free action once per turn
Arcane Realm Spells cost -20% regency

/********** Saint Mark ************/
Miracles and other wonders showing the power of your god come easily from you.

Minor (Cost 1 Point)
Divine Realm Spells cost -10% regency

Major (Cost 3 Points)
Cast Divine Realm Spell as a free action once per turn
Divine Realm Spells cost -20% regency

/********** Militar Mark **********/
Soldiers, units, armies... The bigger their number, the better for you. Your endless legions provide you military and political might.

Minor (Cost 2 Points)
1 Domain Design Point = 7 GB in Armies
Gain RP = 1/2 Army GB maintenance

Major (cost 5 Points)
1 Domain Design Point = 10 GB in Armies
Gain RP = Army GB maintenance

/********* Popular Mark **********/
Love from your people. Being admired, being a model for the children of your peasants and nobles helps you to be even better for them.

Minor (Cost 1 Point)
Each province in high loyalty gives you 1 RP

Major (Cost 3 Points)
Each province in average loyalty gives you 1 RP
Each province in high loyalty gives you 2 RP
Agitate as a free action once per turn

/********** Trader Mark **********/
Money changing from someone hands to another ones, the flow of resources between different parts of the world,... Trading is good for your guilds, for your country,... and for you.

Minor (Cost 1 Point)
2 Domain Design Points = 1 Trade Route
Gain RP = 1/2 Trade Route income

Major (Cost 3 Points)
1 Domain Design Point = 1 Trade Route
Gain RP = Trade Route income

/********** Economy Mark *********/
You can never save enough money!

Minor (Cost 1 Point)
1 Domain Design Point = 7 GB
Gain RP = 10% of saved GB

Major (Cost 3 Points)
1 Domain Design Point = 10 GB
Gain RP = 20% of saved GB

Hope you enjoyed it! Sorry for the long post. Greetings,

Vicente

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[ryancaveney]

On Tue, 3 Dec 2002, Zaor wrote:

> this system is for taking out regency from character classes, and
> instead, giving it to a new thing called "Regency Marks".

Intriguing! I really like the ability to so completely customize your
regency style, though I would quibble with the specific numbers.

> He can use these points to buy his bloodline (so you don`t roll it
> anymore (this is from my game: my players don`t like rolling bloodline
> strength)) and regency marks.

In play, regents can use RP to increase their bloodline score. Is there a
way for players to, over the course of a game, increase their regency
marks? For example, after several years of successful campaigning, could
a regent upgrade a minor warlord mark to a major one, or even add one from
scratch if he had planned to be a guilder but found himself often at war?

> He earns regency from his military units (their maintenance in gb
> is his income in rp),

That seems like an awful lot of RP to me. Admittedly, having a large army
at your command tends to make people listen to what you have to say, but I
don`t think a military specialist who leads just two units of knights
ought to be the political equal of a land specialist who owns a level-4
province and can raise as many knights as he wants -- especially as with
your current numbers, Warlord Major is only half the cost of Land Great.

> Seing that, he decides he is not going to have many holdings: he
> will be probably a lieutenant for another character (he can be a
> perfect frontier general, asuming the protection of border provinces).

So what will he use his RP for? His liege lord ought to be worried about
whether Barlak is going to be a little too much like a Roman frontier
general, and try to claim the crown for his own once he has enough.

> /********** SPECIAL MARKS **********/
> 1 Regent Design Point = +2 Bloodline Strength
> 1 Regent Design Point = +3 Domain Design Points

So these two are inherent to every regent character, yes?

> /************ Land Mark ***********/
> Tainted (Cost 1 Point)
> Regency Income = Population Level / 4 (rounded down)
> Great (Cost 10 Points)
> Regency Income = Population Level

I think these tend to undervalue provinces, especially as it only
costs 7 points to get full regency from a non-province holding! To
try to reproduce the original rules` notion that everyone likes to own
provinces (which I endorse), I`d either make these much cheaper or
much more effective -- if I`m going to plunk down 10 points for Land
Mark, Great, I want it to be at least *two* RP per province level. I`d be
happier with just three levels: minor (1/4 for 1), major (1/2 for 2) and
great (1/1 for 4).

> /********** Warlord Mark **********/
> Minor (Cost 1 Point)
> +10% Regency during wars

This is an amusing idea, in that it encourages people to undertake
dangerous and expensive projects when they are short of RP. One question,
though: what does "during wars" mean? IMO, the Declare War action only
lasts one action round, and must be selected as your domain action in
every action round you want to have your troops move on foreign soil;
however, RP are only collected once every domain turn (three action
rounds). I don`t see how this one works.

> /********* Sorcerer Mark **********/
> Major (Cost 3 Points)
> Cast Arcane Realm Spell as a free action once per turn
> /********** Saint Mark ************/
> Major (Cost 3 Points)
> Cast Divine Realm Spell as a free action once per turn

That`s quite impressive. I`d say it`s too powerful for so low a cost.

> /********** Military Mark **********/
> Minor (Cost 2 Points)
> Gain RP = 1/2 Army GB maintenance
> Major (cost 5 Points)
> Gain RP = Army GB maintenance

As I said above, I think 1/2 and 1 are too high; I`d say better fractions
would be more like 1/5 and 1/2, but even that I don`t really like. I`d be
more comfortable implementing this kind of idea as a reduction in GB cost
of maintenance, say 10% and 25% discounts.

> /********* Popular Mark **********/
> Major (Cost 3 Points)
> Each province in average loyalty gives you 1 RP
> Each province in high loyalty gives you 2 RP
> Agitate as a free action once per turn

Wow. Again, as balanced against what it costs to get full regency from a
holding type, I think this is too powerful for the price. That is my
primary objection to your point values in general: perhaps as a way to
encourage the new ideas, they are much too cheap relative to the old
standards of simple holding ownership.

> /********** Economy Mark *********/
> Minor (Cost 1 Point)
> Gain RP = 10% of saved GB
> Major (Cost 3 Points)
> Gain RP = 20% of saved GB

This is actually the one that scares me the most, as I envision a wizard
or dragon or other long-lived creature that picks just this, a moderate
bloodline and a sizable treasury, then goes into hiding for a few decades
only to emerge with enough RP to take over any realm it wants... or
perhaps that is exactly the explanation you`d give for the Magian?


Ryan Caveney

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Birthright-L]

Hello,

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ryan B. Caveney" <ryanb@CYBERCOM.NET>

thanks a lot for your comments. You´ve done very nice points.

> Intriguing! I really like the ability to so completely customize your
> regency style, though I would quibble with the specific numbers.

Well, some numbers or abilities are probably influenced by our way of
playing, so maybe some numbers are a little low or some marks to powerful
for their cost. You could go making all special marks cost 2 for minor and 5
for major.

> In play, regents can use RP to increase their bloodline score. Is there a
> way for players to, over the course of a game, increase their regency
> marks? For example, after several years of successful campaigning, could
> a regent upgrade a minor warlord mark to a major one, or even add one from
> scratch if he had planned to be a guilder but found himself often at war?

I haven´t come up with any rule that I like to allow upgrading or earning
new regency marks. I think I´m going with the roleplaying part, as the
campaigning example you give. If a character keeps doing something well for
a lot of time, that mark will probably go up.

> That seems like an awful lot of RP to me. Admittedly, having a large army
> at your command tends to make people listen to what you have to say, but I
> don`t think a military specialist who leads just two units of knights
> ought to be the political equal of a land specialist who owns a level-4
> province and can raise as many knights as he wants -- especially as with
> your current numbers, Warlord Major is only half the cost of Land Great.

Land gives more power appart from rp. If you don´t own land, you can´t
recruit troops, recieve income,... That´s why the cost of basic marks is
higher than the cost of extra marks. But you could halve the numbers: 1/4
and 1/2.

> So what will he use his RP for? His liege lord ought to be worried about
> whether Barlak is going to be a little too much like a Roman frontier
> general, and try to claim the crown for his own once he has enough.

Well, that claim attempt could happen. If he is a lieutenant, he will
give some of his rp collection to his lord, and in exchange, he could get
some money or permission to recruit armies. He could use his regency to
develop the provinces were he is stationed, agitate the new provinces he
conquers to raise loyalty,... Barlak could even pay some of his armies with
rp (not very wise, but sometimes necessary).

Melisande Reaversbane (from heavens of the great bay), the captain of
Müden navy is quite similar to this Barlak, although with only bloodline
strength 13 as she has, it´s quite easily to get the maximun (she has enough
law holdings to reach that number).

> > /********** SPECIAL MARKS **********/
> > 1 Regent Design Point = +2 Bloodline Strength
> > 1 Regent Design Point = +3 Domain Design Points
>
> So these two are inherent to every regent character, yes?

Yes. I don´t like much the 1 rdp = +3 ddp, because 1 rdp = +2 bloodline
(and thus, +2 ddp), but even it´s not a big win buying ddp rather than
bloodline, my players have spent from 3 to 5 points in that mark, so I don´t
feel very confortable changing it to +4 ddp. I can post my players marks if
it´s some interest.

> I think these tend to undervalue provinces, especially as it only
> costs 7 points to get full regency from a non-province holding! To
> try to reproduce the original rules` notion that everyone likes to own
> provinces (which I endorse), I`d either make these much cheaper or
> much more effective -- if I`m going to plunk down 10 points for Land
> Mark, Great, I want it to be at least *two* RP per province level. I`d be
> happier with just three levels: minor (1/4 for 1), major (1/2 for 2) and
> great (1/1 for 4).

Land rulers hold great power in that they limit the maximun level of
holdings, they can affect all subjects in their realm, they can limit army
raising, they earn money,... Maybe it´s style of play, but normally, all the
other regents (except source regents) always bow to the land ruler. And if
he holds the law, much more. Also, some of the math was done to try to make
birthright classes regency income similar: a fighter would have land, great
and law, great (using 17 points). 10 for bloodline makes 27. So he would
have 3 more (probably some fighting marks, or increasing his domain or his
bloodmark).

For the levels: I put them that way (tainted, minor,...) to follow
bloodline levels (I was tempted to add a fith level: True (I would put this
one the 2 rp per level), but I decided to let it out (is as strange as a
true bloodline: I imagine "Source, True" goes quite well for the regent of
Thuarievel).

> > /********** Warlord Mark **********/
> > Minor (Cost 1 Point)
> > +10% Regency during wars
>
> This is an amusing idea, in that it encourages people to undertake
> dangerous and expensive projects when they are short of RP. One question,
> though: what does "during wars" mean? IMO, the Declare War action only
> lasts one action round, and must be selected as your domain action in
> every action round you want to have your troops move on foreign soil;
> however, RP are only collected once every domain turn (three action
> rounds). I don`t see how this one works.

Yes, declare war only lasts one action in the rulebook. We have as a
house rule that Declare War lasts for a full domain turn (also to encourage
war, although I must admit we never felt very confortable with the way war
is handled in the rulebook).


> > /********* Sorcerer Mark **********/
> > Major (Cost 3 Points)
> > Cast Arcane Realm Spell as a free action once per turn
> > /********** Saint Mark ************/
> > Major (Cost 3 Points)
> > Cast Divine Realm Spell as a free action once per turn
>
> That`s quite impressive. I`d say it`s too powerful for so low a cost.

I found my spellcasting regents weren´t normally casting many spells as
they normally run out of actions: having to do diplomacies, taking care of
problems, researching,... They didn´t cast spells as often as someone could
expect from a wizard (and clerics less and less: they are more political
involved usually). That´s the reason of the free action.

> > /********** Military Mark **********/
> > Minor (Cost 2 Points)
> > Gain RP = 1/2 Army GB maintenance
> > Major (cost 5 Points)
> > Gain RP = Army GB maintenance
>
> As I said above, I think 1/2 and 1 are too high; I`d say better fractions
> would be more like 1/5 and 1/2, but even that I don`t really like. I`d be
> more comfortable implementing this kind of idea as a reduction in GB cost
> of maintenance, say 10% and 25% discounts.

Could also work. But I liked more the regency income to keep all marks
related to regency points. If I was going to give a discount, I would make
units cheaper to maintain through the use of regency points (4 points for
minor and 3 for major. That would reflect maintaining them thanks to
personal charisma, magnetism,...)

> > /********* Popular Mark **********/
> > Major (Cost 3 Points)
> > Each province in average loyalty gives you 1 RP
> > Each province in high loyalty gives you 2 RP
> > Agitate as a free action once per turn
>
> Wow. Again, as balanced against what it costs to get full regency from a
> holding type, I think this is too powerful for the price. That is my
> primary objection to your point values in general: perhaps as a way to
> encourage the new ideas, they are much too cheap relative to the old
> standards of simple holding ownership.

Most people don´t have many provinces, and it´s quite hard to have them
in good loyalty levels. But probably you have some point here in the values.
I don´t think I did it in purpose, but maybe to encourage my players I let
them too cheap. I´ll review them ;)

> > /********** Economy Mark *********/
> > Minor (Cost 1 Point)
> > Gain RP = 10% of saved GB
> > Major (Cost 3 Points)
> > Gain RP = 20% of saved GB
>
> This is actually the one that scares me the most, as I envision a wizard
> or dragon or other long-lived creature that picks just this, a moderate
> bloodline and a sizable treasury, then goes into hiding for a few decades
> only to emerge with enough RP to take over any realm it wants... or
> perhaps that is exactly the explanation you`d give for the Magian?

Don´t know the Magian case (only have birthright setting box, heavens and
some domain books). I would like to hear its history.

And for the mark. The explanation was too short: it´s economy mark, not
"bank account mark" ;) Money has to get in or out (you must have some income
and/or expenses), you can`t just sit and see your regency go up.

Hope that helps. I´m going to review some numbers ;)

Greetings,

Vicente

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[ryancaveney]

On Wed, 4 Dec 2002, Zaor wrote:

> thanks a lot for your comments.

You`re welcome. I love exploring variant rules. =)

OTOH, I am somewhat ashamed to admit I rarely say anything about those
given as website references, in part because I so rarely get around to
actually looking them up. Sorry, Starfox. :/

> Well, some numbers or abilities are probably influenced by our way of
> playing, so maybe some numbers are a little low or some marks to
> powerful for their cost.

This is an interesting point in itself -- balancing costs depends to a
certain extent on guessing how people will use the abilities they buy, but
not I think an overwhelming one.

> Land gives more power apart from rp. If you don`t own land, you can`t
> recruit troops, recieve income,

True. However, all this power is obtainable without a Land Mark of any
kind -- just as people without Law Marks can still own law holdings and
use them to make claims against other holdings` income, suppress trade
routes, and levy some kinds of troops; and anyone who wants more cash can
create some guild holdings and trade routes during play. In each case,
the only during-play area in which regents differ by class in the original
system is the amount of RP they collect from these holdings, not what else
they can do with them (except for realm spells). Therefore, it seems to
me that the Marks should only affect RP- and DDP-related things, and in
the original system everyone got full RP from land, so Land Marks should
be cheap.

> Land rulers hold great power in that they limit the maximun level of
> holdings, they can affect all subjects in their realm, they can limit
> army raising, they earn money,...

Agreed (though they need law to be any good at raising money). Perhaps
this means buying a good DDP-to-province-level conversion should be
expensive, but I still think RP-from-land should be cheap, because these
functions are entirely separate from RP per se.

> Also, some of the math was done to try to make
> birthright classes regency income similar:

Yes, but *everyone* had Land, Great in the original rules, so its point
value can`t really be determined this way.

> For the levels: I put them that way (tainted, minor,...) to follow
> bloodline levels

Yes, I gathered that. But some (like some blood abilities) have only
major & minor, and I saw a place for a 3-level system (minor, major and
great, like some other blood abilities), so I went with it.

> (I was tempted to add a fith level: True (I would put this one the 2
> rp per level), but I decided to let it out (is as strange as a true
> bloodline: I imagine "Source, True" goes quite well for the regent of
> Thuarievel).

This sounds fairly reasonable to me, as long as you do keep it that rare.

> Yes, declare war only lasts one action in the rulebook. We have as a
> house rule that Declare War lasts for a full domain turn (also to
> encourage war, although I must admit we never felt very confortable
> with the way war is handled in the rulebook).

So you think one Declare War should give 12 War Moves, not 4? If for some
reason a regent did a Declare War in an action round other than the first,
would you let the war moves extend into the next domain turn?

> I found my spellcasting regents weren`t normally casting many spells
> as they normally run out of actions: having to do diplomacies, taking
> care of problems, researching,... They didn`t cast spells as often as
> someone could expect from a wizard (and clerics less and less: they
> are more political involved usually). That`s the reason of the free
> action.

Hmm. You may have something here, though I`d be more comfortable making
Research the free action.

> Could also work. But I liked more the regency income to keep all marks
> related to regency points.

True. However, even with the perfectly reasonable discount you suggest,
maintaining units with RP is grossly expensive.

> > > /********* Popular Mark **********/
> Most people don`t have many provinces,

And they need this to make the ones they have worth the price...

> But probably you have some point here in the values. I don`t think I
> did it in purpose, but maybe to encourage my players I let them too
> cheap. I`ll review them ;)

=) I look forward to seeing what you come up with.

> Don`t know the Magian case (only have birthright setting box, heavens
> and some domain books). I would like to hear its history.

Ah, the Magian is probably my favorite awnshegh. He is a lich-like
creature (though whether actually undead or just an undead-like awnshegh
like the Vampire is a subject of some debate) of great magical prowess who
arrived suddenly from parts unknown `several years ago`, and almost
instantly took over the formerly Vos/Khinasi hybrid realm of Pripyat. He
is officially Evil, but he seems to treat his people fairly well -- as he
is a smart supervillain and knows he needs a powerful realm at his
disposal in order to conquer the world; or if you believe his "press
release" in the Blood Enemies book, he simply believes that benevolent
dictatorship under his guidance is the surest path to human happiness.
This sudden complete absorption of an entire realm by a total unknown
could be explained in game mechanics terms by having a huge number (a
thousand, perhaps?) of RPs stored up so as to easily win all resolution
die rolls until managing one massive contested investiture; or else as the
result of a few extremely impressive character actions, as seems rather
reasonable for a 20th-level wizard with a dozen death knight buddies
(actually, one good charm person on the previous regent, to get him to
invest you as heir, would have done fine).

> And for the mark. The explanation was too short: it´s economy mark,
> not "bank account mark" ;) Money has to get in or out (you must have
> some income and/or expenses), you can`t just sit and see your regency
> go up.

OK, that`s better, but then what exactly does the word "saved" in your
formula "Gain RP = 20% of saved GB" mean?


Ryan Caveney

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Birthright-L]

From: "Ryan B. Caveney" <ryanb@CYBERCOM.NET>

OTOH, I am somewhat ashamed to admit I rarely say anything about those
given as website references, in part because I so rarely get around to
actually looking them up. Sorry, Starfox. :/


That is OK - I long ago learned to quote the important parts of what Iwant
to say in the letter, and only include the URL for reference.

/Starfox



__________________________________________________ ___
Följ VM på nära håll på Yahoo!s officielle VM-sajt www.yahoo.se/vm2002
Håll dig ajour med nyheter och resultat, med vinnare och förlorare...

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[ConjurerDragon]

Hello!

Ryan B. Caveney wrote:

>On Tue, 3 Dec 2002, Zaor wrote:
>
>>He earns regency from his military units (their maintenance in gb
>>is his income in rp),
>>
>That seems like an awful lot of RP to me. Admittedly, having a large army
>at your command tends to make people listen to what you have to say, but I
>don`t think a military specialist who leads just two units of knights
>ought to be the political equal of a land specialist who owns a level-4
>province and can raise as many knights as he wants -- especially as with
>your current numbers, Warlord Major is only half the cost of Land Great.
>
If you look at the opposite - paying troops with regency instead of gold
- you have to spend 1 RP for 5 GB
if I remember the values correct, then one could simply say that a
warlord could earn RP equal to the GB maintenance of his troops divided
by 5?
bye
Michael

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Birthright-L]

On Thu, 5 Dec 2002, Michael Romes wrote:
> If you look at the opposite - paying troops with regency instead of gold
> - you have to spend 1 RP for 5 GB
> if I remember the values correct, then one could simply say that a
> warlord could earn RP equal to the GB maintenance of his troops divided
> by 5?

I think you have it the wrong way. It`s 4 RP/GB maintenance.

It`s a bad rule. Soldiers are an expense, they shouldn`t be a source of
income.

To put it another way, if RP are power, then soldiers are the trappings of
power, not the source of it, so they don`t generate RP.
--
Communication is possible only between equals.
Daniel McSorley- mcsorley@cis.ohio-state.edu

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Birthright-L]

Hello,

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ryan B. Caveney" <ryanb@CYBERCOM.NET>

>You`re welcome. I love exploring variant rules. =)

Me too ;)

>This is an interesting point in itself -- balancing costs depends to a
>certain extent on guessing how people will use the abilities they buy, but
>not I think an overwhelming one.

Well, also style of play can influence balancing a lot. The extra marks
don´t get out of hand in my games because "holding" or "land" rulers have
much more politicial weight (not dependent of the rp) in a realm (translated
in actions, resources,...).

>True. However, all this power is obtainable without a Land Mark of any
>kind -- just as people without Law Marks can still own law holdings and
>use them to make claims against other holdings` income, suppress trade
>routes, and levy some kinds of troops; and anyone who wants more cash can
>create some guild holdings and trade routes during play. In each case,
>the only during-play area in which regents differ by class in the original
>system is the amount of RP they collect from these holdings, not what else
>they can do with them (except for realm spells). Therefore, it seems to
>me that the Marks should only affect RP- and DDP-related things, and in
>the original system everyone got full RP from land, so Land Marks should
>be cheap.

Well, maybe my problem in the costs is the assumption that someone
without land mark is not going to have lands: paying 3 points per land level
is way too expensive to get land (same with the rest of holdings). And also
that the act of creating some guilds (or another holding) during play to
earn money or political power is quite hard: there aren´t nearly any empty
spaces in the realms described in the rulebooks. As we always design our
realms, we don´t have the problem of someone getting a realm full of some
thing (temples for example) and not having a mark for that holding (although
that could happen, but it should be strange).

>Yes, but *everyone* had Land, Great in the original rules, so its point
>value can`t really be determined this way.

Yes, you´ve reason here.

>Yes, I gathered that. But some (like some blood abilities) have only
>major & minor, and I saw a place for a 3-level system (minor, major and
>great, like some other blood abilities), so I went with it.

Valid aproach. But I like more the 4 levels aproach (I use it everywhere
in my birth games ;)

>This sounds fairly reasonable to me, as long as you do keep it that rare.

I´m going with that: True gives double rp, but it´s very, very strange
(and you need a true bloodline).

>So you think one Declare War should give 12 War Moves, not 4? If for some
>reason a regent did a Declare War in an action round other than the first,
>would you let the war moves extend into the next domain turn?

They get war moves till the end of the turn. But this action is a very
"house-rule thing". It allows to conquer enemies, invest provinces, and move
full armies into enemy territories... You can move into an enemy realm small
strike groups (raiding, scouting,...) without declaring war. For us, Declare
War is a full scale conflict, not some skirmishes.

>Hmm. You may have something here, though I`d be more comfortable making
>Research the free action.

Well, could do too. But I prefer my spellcasters being more active, so I
gave them a more useful power (and it has not unbalanced the game as they
run out of resources to cast spells if the cast too many).

>True. However, even with the perfectly reasonable discount you suggest,
>maintaining units with RP is grossly expensive.

Yes, quite expensive. You could reduce it more (but then it would be too
cheap in my opinion, and I don´t feel well making them pay 2.5 rp ;)

>And they need this to make the ones they have worth the price...

This could make them worth more. You can´t have all marks and powerful
bloodline, so you must choose carefully how many rp you earn, and your
maximum ;) (none of my players has chosen this mark)

>=) I look forward to seeing what you come up with.

I´ll post it as soon as I review it (although I´m now playing with the
"holdings as classes" thing ;) )

>Ah, the Magian is probably my favorite awnshegh. He is a lich-like
>creature (though whether actually undead or just an undead-like awnshegh

Whoah. That´s a nasty awnshegh. Nice to know from him (every awnshegh is
normally a new world full of problems to the players ;) )

>OK, that`s better, but then what exactly does the word "saved" in your
>formula "Gain RP = 20% of saved GB" mean?

Before you roll your turn income, you get rp. You get 20% of the gb you
have in your treasury in that moment. But you need to have a source of
income and/or expenses to get that percentage. Just sitting with some gb
saved is not going to generate any rp for you.

Greetings,

Vicente

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Birthright-L]

Hello,

> I think you have it the wrong way. It`s 4 RP/GB maintenance.
>
> It`s a bad rule. Soldiers are an expense, they shouldn`t be a source of
> income.

I would admit it´s a different rule, a strange rule, an "I don´t like"
rule,... but a bad rule? Why they can´t be a source of income? The concept
of RP is quite "cloudy" too say the best: if could be faith in a person,
political power, something else, a mix of everything,... And as a temple
regent gets rp for holding the faith of his followers, the general could get
rp from his armies... And a general with armies gets also some political
power,....

> To put it another way, if RP are power, then soldiers are the trappings of
> power, not the source of it, so they don`t generate RP.

They can´t be a source of power because they could use that power to be
maintained??? I don´t get the logic of that argument...

Greetings

Vicente

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[ryancaveney]

On Sat, 7 Dec 2002, Zaor wrote:

> "land" rulers have much more politicial weight (not dependent of the
> rp) in a realm (translated in actions, resources,...).

Province rulers have more actions? That sounds interesting. Tell me more.

> Well, maybe my problem in the costs is the assumption that someone
> without land mark is not going to have lands: paying 3 points per land
> level is way too expensive to get land

Not going to buy it at start, but what about acquiring it during play?

> And also that the act of creating some guilds (or another holding)
> during play to earn money or political power is quite hard: there
> aren`t nearly any empty spaces in the realms described in the
> rulebooks.

But province rulers have it easy. If you want guild slots, you can just
Occupy your own provinces for a month and clean everyone else out --
unless, of course, the guild you take them from has powerful friends
elsewhere. If landed rulers got desperate enough for the money generated
by holdings, every nonlanded guild or temple regent in Cerilia could be
eliminated practically overnight.

> full armies into enemy territories... You can move into an enemy realm
> small strike groups (raiding, scouting,...) without declaring war. For
> us, Declare War is a full scale conflict, not some skirmishes.

I think the action is badly named. I use it to mean simply "conduct
military operations for a month," which is precisely how the rulebook uses
it -- if they hadn`t called it *declare* war, I think there would have
been much less tinkering with the rules for it. I`ve not completely
settled on an alternate name for it, but at present I kind of like calling
it just "Combat". The actual declaration of war in the modern sense is an
instantaneous political act, best implemented in BR IMO if at all by a pro
forma Decree action, or possibly Diplomacy if you want to get fancy. I
really like the idea expressed in the rules that fighting a foreign war
takes up large portions of the regent`s time, and thereby reduces the
amount of attention available to be paid to domestic political issues.

> Well, could do too. But I prefer my spellcasters being more active, so
> I gave them a more useful power (and it has not unbalanced the game as
> they run out of resources to cast spells if they cast too many).

Good point.

> This could make them worth more. You can`t have all marks and
> powerful bloodline, so you must choose carefully how many rp you
> earn, and your maximum ;)

True, but this is one of the reasons I asked about whether you allowed
people to gain marks during play -- since bloodline can be increased by
spending RP (yes, it`s expensive, but it is possible), if marks can`t then
if you`re planning for the long term it makes sense at the start to pick a
relatively low bloodline and lots of marks to "grow into".

> every awnshegh is normally a new world full of problems to the players ;)

Oh yes! If you can get your hands on the "Blood Enemies" book, I think
you will find a great many things of interest.

> Before you roll your turn income, you get rp. You get 20% of the gb
> you have in your treasury in that moment. But you need to have a
> source of income and/or expenses to get that percentage. Just sitting
> with some gb saved is not going to generate any rp for you.

OK, I still don`t quite get how this works. Where is the restriction? If
I have 2,000 GB in my treasury but my income is only 5 GB per season, how
many RP do I get? Gaining RP from income, maybe -- but gaining it from
savings seems like opening the door to disastrous compound interest.


Ryan Caveney

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Birthright-L]

Hello,

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ryan B. Caveney" <ryanb@CYBERCOM.NET>

> > "land" rulers have much more politicial weight (not dependent of the
> > rp) in a realm (translated in actions, resources,...).
>
> Province rulers have more actions? That sounds interesting. Tell me
more.

I explained myself badly: not more actions (although they usually get
"more actions" through lieutenants): different types of actions (some
actions will be impossible for a ruler without holdings) or importance of
their actions (but I don´t remember exactly what I wanted to mean with
that...).

> Not going to buy it at start, but what about acquiring it during play?

Acquiring it during play should be hard. So I wouldn´t design my realm
thinking in that. And also that normally most people have their rp income
cut by their bloodline, so having another mark is not going to earn you
something (well, the agitate action is a very nice adition for a ruler). And
if you are able to rule very well without earning your full bloodline, then
you surely deserved it ;)

> But province rulers have it easy. If you want guild slots, you can just
> Occupy your own provinces for a month and clean everyone else out --
> unless, of course, the guild you take them from has powerful friends
> elsewhere. If landed rulers got desperate enough for the money generated
> by holdings, every nonlanded guild or temple regent in Cerilia could be
> eliminated practically overnight.

Well, I don´t see the act of occupaying your own province, destroying
the holdings and building new ones just so easy. For me, occupaying a
province and wiping out everyone else is a little hard experience for that
province. Also that guilds manage trade and resources (another house rule),
and a realm without resources and his trade routes cut, is a dead realm
unless is lucky to have enough inner reserves, resources,... to survive
without a guilder (or enough to get a new one more loyal to the authority
;). So you can´t go so happily destroying holdings. In our games we have the
same opinion towards law claims: they are a "violent" action against a
holding. It´s like telling someone that he is not welcome. Welcomed holding
rulers normally pay some taxes to the king, but if the king taxes someone,
problems are going to start. In the end is the same result, but the way it´s
done is different.

> I think the action is badly named. I use it to mean simply "conduct
> military operations for a month," which is precisely how the rulebook uses
> it -- if they hadn`t called it *declare* war, I think there would have
> been much less tinkering with the rules for it. I`ve not completely
> settled on an alternate name for it, but at present I kind of like calling
> it just "Combat". The actual declaration of war in the modern sense is an
> instantaneous political act, best implemented in BR IMO if at all by a pro
> forma Decree action, or possibly Diplomacy if you want to get fancy. I
> really like the idea expressed in the rules that fighting a foreign war
> takes up large portions of the regent`s time, and thereby reduces the
> amount of attention available to be paid to domestic political issues.

You have a good point about the action name. Declare war to another
domain fits more a decree or diplomacy action. But I don´t like wars taking
so much time from a regent. It´s probably less logical and correct, but we
like it more this way (my players don´t like to spend actions in wars, they
don´t like to play combats,... and I´m a fan of strategy and I finish
playing the battles me vs me ;)

> True, but this is one of the reasons I asked about whether you allowed
> people to gain marks during play -- since bloodline can be increased by
> spending RP (yes, it`s expensive, but it is possible), if marks can`t then
> if you`re planning for the long term it makes sense at the start to pick a
> relatively low bloodline and lots of marks to "grow into".

Well, the rp you spend incresasing your blood strenght take a lot of
time to pay of. I haven´t seen many people increase their bloodline during a
game. And you would need quite a lot of time to get the full potential of
the mark rp collection (and I don´t think the other beneficts pay for a low
bloodline).

> Oh yes! If you can get your hands on the "Blood Enemies" book, I think
> you will find a great many things of interest.

I´ll try to get one copy, but here in spain is quite hard to find
birthright books (I have only found heavens. The campaign setting is from
england). I think I´ll start buying esd downloads and search for a nice
place to print them.

> OK, I still don`t quite get how this works. Where is the restriction? If
> I have 2,000 GB in my treasury but my income is only 5 GB per season, how
> many RP do I get? Gaining RP from income, maybe -- but gaining it from
> savings seems like opening the door to disastrous compound interest.

If you have 2000 gb in your treasury, you get 20% of that: 400 RP (but I
think your bloodline will limit that big number ;). One of my players get
his rp from that (he started with 120 gb -> 24 RP, not so many). And well,
he is having lots of problems for having such a big quantity of money saved
(thiefs, neighbours asking for loans, neighbours asking for tribute,...).
It´s true that if you go to the extreme, you get very high numbers
(althought bloodline will continue limiting that numbers), but I have to
find someone with 2000 gb saved ;) But the point you give about doing the
math with the income sounds good too.

Great points again. Greetings,

Vicente

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[kgauck]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ryan B. Caveney" <ryanb@CYBERCOM.NET>
Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2002 1:46 PM

> But province rulers have it easy. If you want guild slots, you can just
> Occupy your own provinces for a month and clean everyone else out[.]

I think that makes for bad gaming as well as curious social theory. Bad
gaming in the sense that its impossible to explain why common 1st turn
actions were not done the day before yesterday. Bad gaming in the sense
that its terribly unbalanced. Its curious social theory in the sense that
it really can`t be explained as a universal rule. Protestant and Catholic
landed rulers tried to do this kind of thing for a little over a hundred
years, and it just didn`t work very well at all. Guilders have proved very
slippery regarding such actions. In terms of their networks of trade, the
networks either shift to smuggling, or are merely temporarily suppresed
(more akin to a contested holding).

It is commonly assumed that if I have 4 levels of temple in a level 4
province that I have something approximating 100% devotion of the population
to my god and my doctrines. Should an attack on that temple be possible
with nothing more than a -1 loyalty grade? One has to imagine that the
bonds between templars and worshipers are so weak that if soliders come by
and hang a "closed" sign on the temple, they`ll grumble about it, buts its
basically a done deal.

I contend that its not so easy to eliminate holdings rulers.

Kenneth Gauck
kgauck@mchsi.com

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[ryancaveney]

On Thu, 12 Dec 2002, Zaor wrote:

> I explained myself badly: not more actions (although they usually get
> "more actions" through lieutenants): different types of actions (some
> actions will be impossible for a ruler without holdings)

Oh, OK.

> Acquiring it during play should be hard.
> So I wouldn`t design my realm thinking in that.

Is your campaign mostly about rulership or adventuring? If rulership, I
find it hard to believe that everyone isn`t planning to grow their domains.
Sure, it shouldn`t be easy, or where would the fun and challenge be, but
it ought to be happening at least a little.

> And also that normally most people have their rp income cut by their
> bloodline, so having another mark is not going to earn you something

True.

> Well, I don`t see the act of occupaying your own province, destroying
> the holdings and building new ones just so easy. For me, occupaying a
> province and wiping out everyone else is a little hard experience for
> that province.

Well, yes. Hard on the province, but still rather easy to pull off.
But as you say, difficult to live with the effects of:

> a realm without resources and his trade routes cut, is a dead realm
> unless is lucky to have enough inner reserves, resources,... to
> survive without a guilder (or enough to get a new one more loyal to
> the authority ;). So you can`t go so happily destroying holdings.

But if you can`t get a guilder to play along, sometimes you need to become
one yourself. Ideally you would just take the holdings by Investiture.
If not, then you`d want to Occupy while your enemies were busy elsewhere,
because it will take time and a substantial investment (of actions, RP and
GB) in the Rule action to recover the lost holding levels.

> In our games we have the same opinion towards law claims: they are a
> "violent" action against a holding. It`s like telling someone that he
> is not welcome. Welcomed holding rulers normally pay some taxes

I see things completely differently. IMO, law claims are precisely the
taxes that all other holdings normally pay.

> You have a good point about the action name. Declare war to another
> domain fits more a decree or diplomacy action.

Glad you agree.

> But I don`t like wars taking so much time from a regent. It`s probably
> less logical and correct, but we like it more this way

To each his own, I suppose. I like that it takes time, and that it seems
more logical.

> and I`m a fan of strategy and I finish playing the battles me vs me ;)

*grin* Me too. I`m more a wargamer than a roleplayer, which is precisely
what drew me to Birthright -- finally, a moderately workable system for
running your own fantasy country! The domain rulership chapter of the old
D&D Companion Set had some good ideas, but was so low-level (needing to
know the number of families engaged in each industry, for example) that it
was practically impossible to use to run anything bigger than a single
province (3).

> Well, the rp you spend incresasing your blood strenght take a lot of
> time to pay of. I haven`t seen many people increase their bloodline
> during a game.

I quite agree. Hence my recent posts about liking systems to provide
additional incentives for spending on bloodline growth, or allow
bloodlines to grow a little on their own without spending.

> And you would need quite a lot of time to get the full potential of
> the mark rp collection (and I don`t think the other beneficts pay for
> a low bloodline).

Perhaps.

> I think I`ll start buying esd downloads and search for a nice place to
> print them.

Good plan!

> If you have 2000 gb in your treasury, you get 20% of that: 400 RP

So then why does having income or expenses matter?

> (but I think your bloodline will limit that big number ;).

Well, quite. But plugging really big numbers into formulas helps me spot
potential problems.

> but I have to find someone with 2000 gb saved ;)

I was thinking of a dragon or lich or other secretive, ancient, powerful
being (for whom a 4 million gp value hoard is actually not that
unreasonable based on the treasure tables); if you allow RP to accumulate
indefinitely, they could hide in a hole with their pile of cash, spending
RP to increase their bloodline as desired, and then emerge after a few
centuries with immensely huge numbers of RP saved up, ready to conquer the
world without trying too hard. If you`re a "regent" of nothing but a pile
of gold, there shouldn`t be many demands on your time.


Ryan Caveney

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[ryancaveney]

On Thu, 12 Dec 2002, Kenneth Gauck wrote:

> From: "Ryan B. Caveney" <ryanb@CYBERCOM.NET>
> > But province rulers have it easy. If you want guild slots, you can just
> > Occupy your own provinces for a month and clean everyone else out[.]
>
> I think that makes for bad gaming as well as curious social theory.
>
> Bad gaming in the sense that its impossible to explain why common 1st
> turn actions were not done the day before yesterday. Bad gaming in the
> sense that its terribly unbalanced.

Very true.

> Its curious social theory in the sense that it really can`t be
> explained as a universal rule. Protestant and Catholic landed rulers
> tried to do this kind of thing for a little over a hundred years, and
> it just didn`t work very well at all.

Very true.

> I contend that its not so easy to eliminate holdings rulers.

I agree this is a rule that ought to be changed, but in the message you
quote I was discussing a different set of house rules. =)

How would you go about modifying this rule? Preventing it, and keeping it
just to the contest action? Allowing occupation, but only letting the
troops doing it act as additional law holdings to improve the target
number of the contest action? Would you also change the contest action,
so that a holding did not simply disappear after a second successful
contest, but instead only dropped one level?


Ryan Caveney

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Peter Lubke]

On Sat, 2002-12-14 at 12:01, Kenneth Gauck wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ryan B. Caveney" <ryanb@CYBERCOM.NET>
> Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002 10:34 AM
>
>
> > How would you go about modifying [the Occupation] rule?
> > Preventing it, and keeping it just to the contest action?
> > Allowing occupation, but only letting the troops doing it act
> > as additional law holdings to improve the target number of
> > the contest action?
>
> An Occupation that automatically causes a negative loyalty shift and just
> added the troops as a contest bonus modifier seems about right.

I agree.

Loyalty (first because it`s easier)

case (i) Province regent "occupies" province by declaration of martial
law - province regent may have law holding -- case (i)a or not case
(i)b. The negative shift should occur - but should not be able to be
ignored by the presence of a large law presence -- after all that`s what
caused the shift, bringing in more law.

case (ii) another regent occupies province with troops - creating a
neutralized or contested province. No RP to anyone - but GB to
controlling regent (occupier). Province loyalty is automatically
rebellious toward occupier - remains unchanged toward regent.

Suppression/Neutralization of Holdings by Armed Troops (the real point)

Letting each unit of troops act as a point of law holding (whether
acting together with local law holdings or independently where no law
holding exists) seems consistent with other actions.

Automatically allowing the contest of all holdings in the province
succeed does seem rather harsh (original rule), regardless of who is
doing the suppression (i) or (ii). Thus I favor dropping the rule too.

Obviously a regent with a strong law presence and troops will have a
decided advantage in a contest action against a single holding.

Perhaps though, allowing each unit of troops to act independently so
that the controlling regent can perform "Contest Holding(s)" as a realm
action -- against several holdings in the same province, one per unit,
plus one for any law holding he may have. Of course the strength of the
individual Contests where a single law unit is involved is only 1 -- but
consider that the holdings cannot attack the military unit directly.




>
> > Would you also change the contest action, so that a
> > holding did not simply disappear after a second successful
> > contest, but instead only dropped one level?
>
> I certainly do prefer this method.
<<SNIP>>
> My feeling generally boils down to the idea that it
> takes a single action to remove (by whatever means) each of these key
> figures individually.
>

I don`t think that such a change is dependent on the other changes
suggested above. However, the pro`s and con`s of changing Contest to
just drop a single point is a good topic by itself.

Contest Holding just covers too much ground. It has three functions:
(a) contest to destroy a neutralized or 0-level holding; destruction
(B) contest to neutralize an opponent (of dissimilar opponent); to
reduce their influence; as preparation for destruction -- (a)
&copy; contest as preparation to rule (of like holding)

(B) Can of course be used against similar targets too (intention), but
nonetheless opens the opportunity as &copy; does.

An assumption is that all domain actions should be roughly similar in
the degree to which they change the situation.

We could classify or rename the Contest Holding action into three
differently determined actions. Therefore:

(a) Destroy Holding - holdings should be difficult to destroy, and the
larger they are the more difficult this should be. Only 0-level holdings
and neutralized holdings can be destroyed. A target holding adds its
level to the success number. Base success is 20 - province level. Cost
is 1 GB per target level.

e.g. Province(7), guild(2), (B) temple(4)
-- success (Destroy Temple) = 20-7 + 4 = 17
-- success (Destroy Guild) = 20-7 + 2 = 15

(B) Neutralize Holding -- temporarily stymie a holding from taking most
actions or allowing it to participate fully in province activities. It
should be more difficult to neutralize a larger holding. Base success is
10, add target level to success number.

e.g. Province(7), (a) law(6), (B) guild(2)
-- success (Neutralize Law) = 10 + 6 = 16
-- success (Neutralize Guild) = 10 + 2 = 12

&copy; Contest Holding -- a struggle for control of a point of holding
level, if successful one point of holding changes hands. There is no
requirement for a rule holding action. Should be more difficult than
rule holding (d). No province modifiers apply - this is a struggle
between two regents for control. Base chance is 20 minus the province
level. It`s harder to contest control in a smaller province where a
small holding can be a monopoly. Add the larger of the two holding
levels plus 1.

e.g. Province(7), guild(2), guild(4)
-- success (Contest Guild) = 20-7 + 4 + 1 = 18

Rule Holding has two functions:
(d) Increase Holding -- build holding up by one point. All holdings of
similar type (including the value of your present holding) resist the
increase. If the province regent opposes the action and his law presence
(or half the province level rounded down) is greater than the current
resistance, use that value instead - otherwise add 1 to the resistance.
Base success is 10.

e.g. province(7), temple(2), temple(4), law(x)
-- success (Increase Temple) = 10 + (2+4) = 16; or;
-- success (Increase Temple) but realm opposed; = 17

(e) Restore Holding -- restore a neutralized holding to full operating
capacity. This should generally be quite easy regardless of the size of
the holding. It is opposed by the other holdings of the same type in the
province; or by the province regent`s law holding if he opposes -
whichever is the greater value. Base success is 10.

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[kgauck]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ryan B. Caveney" <ryanb@CYBERCOM.NET>
Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002 10:34 AM


> How would you go about modifying [the Occupation] rule?
> Preventing it, and keeping it just to the contest action?
> Allowing occupation, but only letting the troops doing it act
> as additional law holdings to improve the target number of
> the contest action?

An Occupation that automatically causes a negative loyalty shift and just
added the troops as a contest bonus modifier seems about right.

> Would you also change the contest action, so that a
> holding did not simply disappear after a second successful
> contest, but instead only dropped one level?

I certainly do prefer this method. I view each level of holding as being a
key NPC and his entourage, or court. El-Hadid has 3 guild holdings in
Ciliene. I see this as three key figures who can control trade in Ciliene.
One may be a large sheep merchant, with wool, herds, and meat interests.
He`s el-Hadid`s man, and his organization is a part of el-Hadid`s Port of
Call Exchange. Another is the guildmaster of the Blacksmith`s guild in
Ciliene. He and the blacksmiths have allied with el-Hadid. The third is a
member of Diemed`s government, the Lord Mayor of Markets in Ciliene who uses
the rules of the marketplace to favor the merchants given the nod by Port of
Call. An initial contest action attacks the Port of Call Exchange as an
organization. Guilder Kalien argues that they cheat their customers. Or,
maybe the OIT attacks their dishonest and dishonorable practices. Perhaps
Heirl Diem declares the Port of Call betrays the people of Diemed to foriegn
interests. Individual merchants conceal their association with the PoCE,
and so no regency is collected. Even so, customers stay away (including
wealthy members of the rival holdings) and no profits leave the province.
But this doesn`t do any long term damage to the holdings of e-Hadid in
Ciliene. To do that, one or more of these three figures need to be
arrested, killed, driven out of the province, or discredited before his
merchantile network. My feeling generally boils down to the idea that it
takes a single action to remove (by whatever means) each of these key
figures individually.

Kenneth Gauck
kgauck@mchsi.com

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[kgauck]

From time to time I see statements to the effect that "You need a strong
economy to survive without a guilder." I think that confuses a guy who
reaps benefits from organizing the marketplace to suit his own interests
with the marketplace itself. The market will always exist, and from the
point of view of consumers and small producers, probabaly works better with
no guilder in charge. Such a person, is after all, diverting part of the
surplus away from the economy and towards himself and his management of the
economy (and managed economys are in themselves less effecient). With no
guilder, realms should do just fine, economically.

The reason there are guilders are twofold. One, no one stops the robber
barons. And two, the guilders have a divine patron who wishes wealth to
stand toe to toe with force, faith, and phantasm as a social entity.
Coordinated human activity requires leaders (markets function best when they
are not coordiated) and if the monied classes are to protect their interests
(in part by squelching competition and ease of access to the market) they
need leaders. Guilders are classical oligarchs.

The interest of the organizers of human activity always want to extract more
surplus (hence social science sometimes refers to them as kleptocrats) so
having a guilder who represents another source of GB`s and RP`s can make a
realm strong (if he`s friendly with the other rulers. Of course he can be
trouble if he`s hostile. But a neutral guilder who doesn`t use RP or GB to
help or harm the realm is no different from having no guilder at all, except
that the people have one less court to fund, don`t have to fund his attacks
and defences of a realm, and don`t have their market twisted to benefit a
ruler rather than the natural increase in wealth.

None of which is to say that an ideology of Smithian capitalism exists in
Cerilia, or that the workers of the world should unit, because they have
nothing to lose but their chains. I`m just saying that the advantages of
having a guilder aren`t that he makes people more prosperous (he does the
opposite) but that he is a locus of power that can be used to make things
happen.

Kenneth Gauck
kgauck@mchsi.com

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Birthright-L]

Hello,

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ryan B. Caveney" <ryanb@CYBERCOM.NET>

> Is your campaign mostly about rulership or adventuring? If rulership, I
> find it hard to believe that everyone isn`t planning to grow their
domains.
> Sure, it shouldn`t be easy, or where would the fun and challenge be, but
> it ought to be happening at least a little.

My campaign is only about rulership (no adventuring at all). About
growing their domains... well, half of my players only ;) One is playing
with a noble house only interested in killing undeads (he is planning
attacks on the vampire etc etc) and another is an architect (a mark I didn´t
put as it was based in house rules: Builder Mark - you get rp for building
things (farms, castles, workshops,...)). The other two are a little more
aggresive (the captain of müden navy and a wizard).

> But if you can`t get a guilder to play along, sometimes you need to become
> one yourself. Ideally you would just take the holdings by Investiture.
> If not, then you`d want to Occupy while your enemies were busy elsewhere,
> because it will take time and a substantial investment (of actions, RP and
> GB) in the Rule action to recover the lost holding levels.

Well, you are going to divert lot of time and resources making yourself
a guilder. And you need a strong economy to survive without one. But I agree
sometimes it could be necesary, but you´ll need to think carefully about
that move.

> *grin* Me too. I`m more a wargamer than a roleplayer, which is precisely
> what drew me to Birthright -- finally, a moderately workable system for
> running your own fantasy country! The domain rulership chapter of the old
> D&D Companion Set had some good ideas, but was so low-level (needing to
> know the number of families engaged in each industry, for example) that it
> was practically impossible to use to run anything bigger than a single
> province (3).

Hehehe, same happens to me: when I first played birthright with an old
friend I just loved the game. I´ve been nearly continuosly playing and
tweeking it since then (like most people here I think ;)

> I quite agree. Hence my recent posts about liking systems to provide
> additional incentives for spending on bloodline growth, or allow
> bloodlines to grow a little on their own without spending.

I make them grow with good rulership (like they can go down with bad
rulership). But it´s true they should be changing a little more easily.

> > If you have 2000 gb in your treasury, you get 20% of that: 400 RP
>
> So then why does having income or expenses matter?

So you can´t just sit down with your pile of money and see your regency
grow. You could say you need to have a "sustancial" income related to that
quantity of money (5%, 10%,...?), so if you have 2000 gb you need an income
of 200gb... But I´m starting to like more and more your idea of tying the rp
collection from the economy mark to your turn income rather than to your
treasury.

> I was thinking of a dragon or lich or other secretive, ancient, powerful
> being (for whom a 4 million gp value hoard is actually not that
> unreasonable based on the treasure tables); if you allow RP to accumulate
> indefinitely, they could hide in a hole with their pile of cash, spending
> RP to increase their bloodline as desired, and then emerge after a few
> centuries with immensely huge numbers of RP saved up, ready to conquer the
> world without trying too hard. If you`re a "regent" of nothing but a pile
> of gold, there shouldn`t be many demands on your time.

Very true. I´m going with your income idea ;) But if I don´t remember
badly, it was first regency income and later gb income. I can´t think of any
problem for doing this just the other way: first gb and then rp so you can
calculate your rp income from economy. Any idea about how many rp should be
gained from economy then?

Greetings,

Vicente

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[irdeggman]

IMO think in terms of the "family" for the role of guilders. While not basically (or at least not always) criminal or oppressive, the simile, I think applies. Guild regents generate income in GB while merchants generate income in gp - use the profession rules from the PHB (3rd ed that is). IMO this points out the difference in fairly understandable terms.

The guilders can either support the powers that be, oppose them or selectively choose between which they do. Sort of like a company making donations to a political party, or making donations to "both" olitical parties in hopes of currying some "future" favors. "Money make the world go around, the world go around, the world go around.":)

[Vicente]

Hello,


Originally posted by kgauck
From time to time I see statements to the effect that "You need a strong
economy to survive without a guilder." I think that confuses a guy who
reaps benefits from organizing the marketplace to suit his own interests


When I said that you needed a strong economy to survive without a guilder, I was referring to my own game (related to some house rules). Guilders manage resources (iron, wood, food, furs,...). For example: if Ilien wants to recruit armies, it needs some weapons (or materials to forge the weapons). As Ilien is not likely to mine any metal, when it recruits, I assume some guilder gets weapons or metal from one of the trade routes and then he makes a profit selling them to Ilien (and Ilien is able to recruit). If there aren´t any guilds in your realm, and you lack something, you are in a big trouble ;) That´s why I said that a realm without a guild needed a good economy (maybe better a good reserve or resources).

Of course in normal birthright you don´t have any problem for not having a guilder (well, you miss some gb from law claims), but nothing more.

Greetings,

Vicente

[kgauck]

Vicente,

While I did use your phrase, I wasn`t specifically responding to your post. I
just took the opportunity to make a general statement.

Kenneth Gauck
kgauck@mchsi.com

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.