The Noble class

[Azrai]

I dont't think the noble is a very attractive class to play. It is
pretty close to the typical NPC class. This class should
definitely be improved.

Give some more special and level dependent abilities.

Consider the Noble class in the "Wheel of Time RPG" which works
pretty well.

- Inspire Confidence: a noble can use oratory to inspire
confidence in allies.

- call in favor: kind of gather information

Give them some Bardic like abilities. We should discuss this in
detail.

[irdeggman]

That is a discussion that was brought up by the development team also, whether or not it was a playable class. Part of the original logic was the feat progression, roughly the same as that of a fighter but they can be any feats not just those from a restrictive list like those for wizards and fighters.

[Azrai]

Yep, I see the point. It's not that bad, but it's not attractiv. Some additional bardic abilities will do it.

[kgauck]

Many settings produce the Charisma based noble class. The über example of
this trend is the Courtier from the Rokugan setting. I, however, don`t see
the Cerilian noble as a figure dressed in lace and living in a gilded cage.
The noble in this case is a skills based fighter, rather than a feats based
fighter. Charisma is important to the noble, but I`m not impressed with the
charisma based skills I see in other settings` version of the noble. The
BRCS` noble has six skill ranks per level, a fine list of skills, and a nice
array of feats. It allows the Noble to be able to use a variety of fighting
styles. By 10th level (a high level BR character), a noble would have 7
feats, enough for two three feat progressions and Leadership. That strikes
me as about right. Getting into too much of the charisma based features I
see in other settings puts me in the frame of mind of high heels, powdered
wigs, and beauty marks. I think our nobles are more like the 14th century
than the 17th.

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.

[spehar]

Keep in mind the noble class was designed to keep players from taking a class of rogue for the skill points. However, if it's still weak it should be addressed.

Mike

[Birthright-L]

My prefered noble would be based on the ranger. Give it six skill points per
level, full base attack, and a good skill list, and a good Will save - and
nothing else. That way it fights like a fighter, but without the feats, and
completes the package with skills. IMHO, this is a warrior noble - not as
devoted to war as the fighter, but still highly capable.

If we have a lot of ruling-specific feats, the current feat-heavy noble can
work, but people here do not seem too impressed with the ruling-specific
feats.

> spehar wrote:
> Keep in mind the noble class was designed to keep players from taking a
class
> of rogue for the skill points. However, if it`s still weak it should be
addressed.
>



__________________________________________________ ___
Gratis e-mail resten av livet på www.yahoo.se/mail
Busenkelt!

************************************************** **************************
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.

[Azrai]

Originally posted by kgauck
I, however, don`t see
the Cerilian noble as a figure dressed in lace and living in a gilded cage.
The noble in this case is a skills based fighter, rather than a feats based
fighter. Charisma is important to the noble, but I`m not impressed with the
charisma based skills I see in other settings` version of the noble.


I also think the noble should be treated more like a fighter than a rogue or bard. However, to give them some bardic abilities won't change this flair.

The noble's education should give them the possibility to deal with people and manipulate the crowd.

Some additional ability should be included. If you have some other ideas....

[irdeggman]

So that would be bardic abilities in lieu of feats I assume, otherwise the class would become too powerful (compared to the fighter). If the feats aren't taken away in this proposal then the noble would definitely be mechanically far superior to the fighter. Noble gets more skill points, more choices of skills (usually these two go together) and a wide choice of feats (any).

[kgauck]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Azrai" <brnetboard@TUARHIEVEL.ORG>
Sent: Friday, February 21, 2003 4:03 AM


> I also think the noble should be treated more like a fighter than a rogue
> or bard. However, to give them some bardic abilities won`t change this
> flair.
>
> The noble`s education should give them the possibility to deal with
people
> and manipulate the crowd.
>
> Some additional ability should be included. If you have some other
ideas....

Here is my copy of the Aristocrat/Noble class:
http://home.mchsi.com/~kgauck/taelshore/aristocrat.htm

This is my Courtier adopted for Cerilia:
http://home.mchsi.com/~kgauck/taelshore/courtier.htm

The Aristocrat (what BRCS calls Noble) gets strong Leadership advantages,
strong Willpower, the ability to rally allies, and at 17th level, the
ability to take 20 on skill checks that effect realm actions.

The Courtier is the charisma based noble character. I think you`ll find him
the familiar. Note his lore/gossip table uses Cerilian examples. If a
character has a class concept of a more charismatic noble character, I`d
recommend multi-classing as an aristocrat/noble. Because of my use of
backround classes, a courtier will have at least one level as aristocrat.
So far, the only characters who have more courtier than aristocrat are
women. For instance the courtier from Talinie, Carissa Castamona is a 1st
level Aristocrat/5th level Courtier. There are also good PrC`s available
for enhancing other kinds of leadership abilities, such as the Warmaster.

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.

[Azrai]

They look pretty good. http://smiliez.de/images/2076.gif

[irdeggman]

The arisctocrat looks very good. I'd drop the bit about character level for gaining the leadership feat though, it should be class level. I haven't seen a class ability that wasn't class level dependent.

The courtier looks more like it should be an NPC class though. This is based on the class' role not the blance of abilities which is mostly on par with a PC not NPC class.

[geeman]

On the subject of character classes, here`s a link to a character class
generator that is interesting. In many respects I don`t agree with the
numbers presented in it--they appear to be tweaked in order to balance
existing class features rather than balance those features against one
another, the most obvious problem being, of course, the 3e magic
system--but it is an interesting site.

http://www.custoscogitatum.com/tools.cfm

Any thoughts on this?

Gary

************************************************** **************************
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]

On Sat, 22 Feb 2003 12:47:50 +0100, Azrai <brnetboard@TUARHIEVEL.ORG> wrote:

>This post was generated by the Birthright.net message forum.
> You can view the entire thread at:
http://www.birthright.net/read.php?TID=1366
>
> Azrai wrote:
> They look pretty good.

I agree. This noble character class has some flavour (e.g. the wealth
ability is a fine and fitting advantage for adventure level - and not
unbalancing as it is irrelevant on the domain level).

It is better in the abilities/feats, as some feats are fixed (e.g.
Leadership) to prevent the Noble to be a better fighter than the fighter.

Is is good that this Noble has more feats than the Draft 0.0 Noble, as he
already gave up the BAB of the fighter.

I would in addition suggest to take away the "full" martial weapons
proficiency from the Noble. How should he be proficient with such a mass of
weapons, if he is in battle less often than the fighter? Instead a regional
selection of martial weapons, but not all would I see more fitting. A Noble
trains certainly but likely not an Anuirean Noble with the Scimitar or
Greataxe...

Is the "Rally" ability your idea, or from some book? I find the "Hoist the
Black Flag" ability of the Dread Pirate (Song&Silence) similar fitting, with
the obvious change from a black flag to the flag or banner of the realm or
family.

However why has the Noble to go from full Fortitude (+12) to full Will (+12)?
The Aristocrat (NPC) has it in the DMG, but why? When the Noble is based on
a fighter who rules more than he fights, why not something in between, like
Fort+9, Ref +6, Will +9? Or is that against a rule of 3E?

That the noble has to be BORN as a noble I do not find good. When characters
start choosing a character class at Adulthood (p. 93 PHB) wouldn´t it be
social surroundings and training that make a noble a noble, and not
necessarily birth?

This is I think better in the Draft 0.0 in which regents can later
multi-class into Noble.
bye
Michael Romes

************************************************** **************************
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.

[Lord Rahvin]

> I would in addition suggest to take away the "full" martial weapons
> proficiency from the Noble. How should he be proficient with such a mass of
> weapons, if he is in battle less often than the fighter? Instead a regional
> selection of martial weapons, but not all would I see more fitting. A Noble
> trains certainly but likely not an Anuirean Noble with the Scimitar or
> Greataxe...

Why not do this for everyone?
Instead of having access to "all martial weapons", we could just make weapon
groups called things like "Anuire Weapons", "Khinasi Weapons", "Sidhe
Weapons", etc.

We already have that 2e chart that could be used to make these weapon
groups. We could have some such thing where fighters, for example, get
their Regional Weapons plus any single weapon proficiency. Nobles and such
wouldn`t get the additional weapon proficiency, just the Regional Weapons.
Wizards and rogues would just get their usual weapon selection instead of
Regional Weapons. By expending a feat, someone can get access to Regional
Weapons from their region, or if they have it, they can get a different
region`s Regional Weapons.

We could completely replace Martial and Exotic weapons with these Regional
Weapons.

...or did the 0.0 draft do that already? I haven`t read it yet...

-Lord Rahvin

************************************************** **************************
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: "Michael Romes" <Archmage@T-ONLINE.DE>
Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 11:50 AM


> I would in addition suggest to take away the "full" martial
> weapons proficiency from the Noble. How should he be
> proficient with such a mass of weapons, if he is in battle
> less often than the fighter? Instead a regional selection of
> martial weapons, but not all would I see more fitting. A
> Noble trains certainly but likely not an Anuirean Noble with
> the Scimitar or Greataxe...

Something not immediatly obvious from this page was my revised weapons list.
I do heavily reagonalize the weapons list. Many weapons are excluded, at
least one exotic weapon becomes martial. Any given martal weapons list is
thereby smaller. While the noble keeps the martial weapons list, he lacks
the feats to exploit more than one of them, and he can`t take weapon
specialization. Where a fighter might take weapon focus and specialization
, plus appropriate feats (rapier and finess, cleave and high damage weapons,
bows and their feats) for several weapons, the aristocrat is servicable with
the same weapons, but not the highly skilled expert that the fighter can be.
Remeber that aristocrats use these weapons and recreate with combat as part
of their lifestyle. Hunting, competitions, dueling (when anger is roused)
and leading the fighters in battle keep them proficient in all the martial
weapons, but access to a large list of weapons only gives the aristocrat a
choise as to which weapon he`ll specialize in. You`re right to identify a
greataxe and scimitar as inappropriate for Anuireans - they`re exotic.
Common in Rjurik or Khinasi society respectivly, they are not art of the
Anuirean or Brecht armory.

> Is the "Rally" ability your idea, or from some book? I find the "Hoist the
> Black Flag" ability of the Dread Pirate (Song&Silence) similar fitting,
with
> the obvious change from a black flag to the flag or banner of the realm
> or family.

I`m not sure that I found rally as is, but the idea of an ability to grant
allies a second save appears in several places. The Warmaster at 4th level
can rally troops by his mere presence can grant a second save against fear
and charm. By making the ability effortful (aristocrat needs to spend a
full round action to rally) and limiting the effect to fear effects, I keep
the Warmaster ability as an improvement of the same ability rather than a
redundancy.

> However why has the Noble to go from full Fortitude (+12) to full Will
> (+12)? The Aristocrat (NPC) has it in the DMG, but why? When the
> Noble is based on a fighter who rules more than he fights, why not
> something in between, like Fort+9, Ref +6, Will +9? Or is that against a
> rule of 3E?

I think the aristocrat should get the full Will save because his main
ability, the source of his power, is his will to power. Plus as a ruler, he
is a target of those who would flatter, coerce, or charm him. Some
aristocrats may only go through the motions of the hard lifestyle (hunting,
playing hard, mock combats) and lack the Fort fast track. Those who do
embrace fortitude probably multi-class as fighters anyway. In Brectur, the
artisocrat may play the role of a guilder, using his nice skill assortent to
appraise, administer, gather information and use other charisma skills to
run a business. He`ll still have his inner confidence in his own role as a
natural ruler without having an neccesity for a great fortitude.

> That the noble has to be BORN as a noble I do not find good. When
> characters start choosing a character class at Adulthood (p. 93 PHB)
> wouldn´t it be social surroundings and training that make a noble a noble,
> and not necessarily birth?

Too much of the aristocrat`s assortment of skills require being brought up
in the social milieu of nobility, the combination of social skills, combat,
higher learning, and facility with money and administration cannot be
duplicated except by multi-classing. You can make a pretty good
pseudo-aristocrat using either the fighter, the rogue, or the fighter/rogue.
Those who come to titled office later in life need to emulate the aristocrat
thorugh skill chocies.

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.

[Shade]

>> That the noble has to be BORN as a noble I do not find good. When
>> characters start choosing a character class at Adulthood (p. 93 PHB)
>> wouldn´t it be social surroundings and training that make a noble a noble,
>> and not necessarily birth?
>
>Too much of the aristocrat`s assortment of skills require being brought up
>in the social milieu of nobility, the combination of social skills, combat,
>higher learning, and facility with money and administration cannot be
>duplicated except by multi-classing. You can make a pretty good
>pseudo-aristocrat using either the fighter, the rogue, or the fighter/rogue.
>Those who come to titled office later in life need to emulate the aristocrat
>thorugh skill chocies.

Besides, WOTC has already established precedent for a core class that can
only be taken by characters of a certain social class: the OA Samurai.

Arguably the Barbarian is not a very different case either.

************************************************** **************************
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.

[Raedwald]

Just have the requirement to start play as a Noble, the character must be a member of the nobility. Actually this could represent a story problem for halfling characters, since there is only one kingdom ruled by halflings. Ok enough side tracking.

To multiclass at a later point the character must be raised to the nobility by a blooded regent, or have the regent or a noble family acknowledge the characters nobility (in the case of an undeclared bastard, kidnapped at birth, married into family, adopted, etc....)

It should not be a problem, and provides many roleplaying opportunities for a character wanting to multiclass.

[Birthright-L]

From: "Raedwald" <brnetboard@TUARHIEVEL.ORG>

> Just have the requirement to start play as a Noble, the character must
> be a member of the nobility. Actually this could represent a story
problem
> for halfling characters, since there is only one kingdom ruled by
halflings.
> Ok enough side tracking.
>

Far from all nobles have royal relations. Halflings canbe nobles in human
lands. A halfling noble could be the major of a town, ennobeled for his
lojalty or for the financial "contributions" his city gave the king. It
might not be common, but that has less to do with the fact that halflings
are not related with the royal house and more with the fact that halflings
just don`t get off on titles.



__________________________________________________ ___
Gå före i kön och få din sajt värderad på nolltid med Yahoo! Express
Se mer på: http://se.docs.yahoo.com/info/express/help/index.html

************************************************** **************************
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.

[amertes]

I was really impressed by the Noble character when I first read it, and really wanted to play one. I thought the extra feats were great, and envisioned that they would be used to take regency related feats. I think if I had to make a choice between some of the bardic abilities- I'm assuming that you mean the likes of inspire ally-or the extra feats, I would stick with the extra feats. The regency feats seem to be more related to the character, who is going just as much if not more time ruling probably, then rallying his allies for brief periods of time. That's what the bard ability seems to be, inspiration of the moment, whereas a noble would be more one for planning carefully and not depend upon the harder to control emotions of those immediatly around him.

[Azrai]

Originally posted by amertes
I was really impressed by the Noble character when I first read it, and really wanted to play one. I thought the extra feats were great, and envisioned that they would be used to take regency related feats. I think if I had to make a choice between some of the bardic abilities- I'm assuming that you mean the likes of inspire ally-or the extra feats, I would stick with the extra feats.

Sounds like a statement of a power gamer ;) IMO feats are not special enough to "define" a class. In principal you could have the same fun if taking a fighter with some rogue levels. One needs some special abilities to give the class a typical flair.

[Birthright-L]

From: "Azrai" <brnetboard@TUARHIEVEL.ORG>

> IMO feats are not special enough to "define" a class.
> In principal you could have the same fun if taking a fighter
> with some rogue levels. One needs some special abilities
> to give the class a typical flair.
>

I disagree. A generals is also a class. Actually, that is what I`m missing
most in DnD - a generalist class that can fill out for the Expert, but is
PC-worthy.

Here is an attempt I made at such a class for an entirely different setting,
Dragonstar: http://hastur.net/dragonstar/wiki/ImperialProdigy

/Carl



__________________________________________________ ___
Gå före i kön och få din sajt värderad på nolltid med Yahoo! Express
Se mer på: http://se.docs.yahoo.com/info/express/help/index.html

************************************************** **************************
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.

[amertes]

I think what gives a character 'flair' is how they create and role-play their characters. Afterall, what is a fighter but a character with a lot of combat feats? I think what gives the noble 'flair' is his combination of 'social' skills and ability to rule effectively, or help someone else rule effectively.

[Azrai]

Afterall, what is a fighter but a character with a lot of combat feats? I think what gives the noble 'flair' is his combination of 'social' skills and ability to rule effectively, or help someone else rule effectively.

This is exactly what I meant. The number of feats or skills won't define the character class.

[Dantain]

Using the D20 Character Class Engine, the Noble comes out at 220 (broken down as follows):
30 for Hit Die (d8)
15 for all martial weapons
35 on armor(10 for light, 10 for medium, 10 for heavy, 5 for shields)
45 for 6+Int skill points
20 for class skills (excluded new skills as the creators of the class egine did not include those in their calculations, counted knowledge skills (any) as one skill, if raised to three, increase total cost for class skills by 5)
15 for saves (willful as Wizard/Sorcerer)
30 for attack (lesser)
30 for feats (6 general feats 5/feat)
---
220-225 average for PC classes is 250, low is Sorcerer at 215
Adding in Bardic Lore increases it to 230-235
Adding in Bardic Music increases the base to 240-245
Uping attack to Good increases the cost from 30-50 and ups total to 240-245

As a sidenote about the Noble class:
The starting package lists Weapon Focus as a feat, the Noble doesn't qualify for this of due to Base Attack Bonus (clerics are allowed to bypass it for the War domain).

[ConjurerDragon]

Dantain wrote:

>This post was generated by the Birthright.net message forum.
> You can view the entire thread at: http://www.birthright.net/read.php?TID=1366
>
> Dantain wrote:
> Using the D20 Character Class Engine, the Noble comes out at 220 (broken down as follows):
>30 for Hit Die (d8)
>15 for all martial weapons
>
Is this number valid for the normal ALL martial weapons, or for the as I
understood "regional" martial weapon proficiency which means only e.g.
for an Anuirean Noble only weapons of the region?

>35 on armor(10 for light, 10 for medium, 10 for heavy, 5 for shields)
>
10 for each armour proficiency? The nobles of different regions
certainly do not bother to gain proficiency by wearing all
kinds of armour like a fighter. I could for example see a Brecht Guild
Lord never using heavy, or an Anuirean Knight never using light armour
and thus having 10 more points to spend on things more important to a
noble regent.

>45 for 6+Int skill points
>20 for class skills (excluded new skills as the creators of the class egine did not include those in their calculations, counted knowledge skills (any) as one skill, if raised to three, increase total cost for class skills by 5)
>15 for saves (willful as Wizard/Sorcerer)
>30 for attack (lesser)
>30 for feats (6 general feats 5/feat)
>
So with the 10 saved from armour he could take 2 more feats? Then give
him Leadership as fixed feat as the Noble of Kenneth has and another
feat with the restriction to take only rule-enhancing feats (e.g. Regent
Focus...)

>---
>220-225 average for PC classes is 250, low is Sorcerer at 215
>Adding in Bardic Lore increases it to 230-235
>
I can see the Noble knowing a lot about ruling, a lot about laws and
noble titles - knowledge skills.
However Bardic Knowledge? The Noble normally does not adventure most of
his time and does not travel the world to hear storys and songs in inns
and bardic colleges. I do not like the idea to add this to the Noble.

>Adding in Bardic Music increases the base to 240-245
>
? No, please not Bardic Music to anyone besides the Bard.

>Uping attack to Good increases the cost from 30-50 and ups total to 240-245
>
As the noble spends less time fighting than the fighter, he should not
fight as good. Let it stay as it is.

>As a sidenote about the Noble class:
>The starting package lists Weapon Focus as a feat, the Noble doesn`t qualify for this of due to Base Attack Bonus (clerics are allowed to bypass it for the War domain).
>
At least not at first level. Later he easily can take Weapon Focus.

So with removing one of three armour proficiencys (-10) and by bringing
him up to the average you listed as 250 the noble could get another 35
points to spend (more if the reduced martial weapon proficiency counts
for something) on feats?
bye
Michael Romes

************************************************** **************************
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.

[DanMcSorley]

On Fri, 28 Feb 2003, Michael Romes wrote:
> So with removing one of three armour proficiencys (-10) and by bringing
> him up to the average you listed as 250 the noble could get another 35
> points to spend (more if the reduced martial weapon proficiency counts
> for something) on feats?

Do you have Brecht fighters give up heavy armor prof in exchange for
another feat? This kind of min-max swapping isn`t desireably for a
class-based game like 3e. If the game were pointbased, you might have
something there, but it`s not.
--
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.

[Azrai]

Originally posted by DanMcSorley
Do you have Brecht fighters give up heavy armor prof in exchange for
another feat? This kind of min-max swapping isn`t desireably for a
class-based game like 3e. If the game were pointbased, you might have
something there, but it`s not.


I disagree. Of course this min-max stuff does sometimes not fit, but here it is not such a bad way.

[kgauck]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Romes" <Archmage@T-ONLINE.DE>
Sent: Friday, February 28, 2003 10:58 AM


> However Bardic Knowledge? The Noble normally does not adventure most of
> his time and does not travel the world to hear storys and songs in inns
> and bardic colleges. I do not like the idea to add this to the Noble.

I don`t think Dantain literally means Bardic Knowledge, I think this is a
reference to the mechanic first seen for bards, then for loremasters,
courtiers, and several other classes. Give the skill a different name, and
limit its application in the description to apply to any and all of the
things that could be described in the broadest definition of Knowledge
(Nobility and Royalty). The noble might recognize an obscure coat of arms,
recognize a noble he`s never seen by sight (by description), know the
intrigues of a certain court officer, recognize the ancient sword of the
king of Halskappa, and so forth. A noble with access to this kind of
mechanic should not be an expert in things remote from the noble body of
knowledge. Recognizing independent wizards, the use of a religious relic,
the intrigues of a crime boss, or the history of a famed merchant vessel are
all beyond what a noble`s knowledge mechanic would know. For instance, I
would require the mechanic use the Knowledge (Nobility) skill rather than
just level, and to adjust DC`s five higher (accounting for the fact that a
maxed out skill rank can be 3 higher than level, and skill focus can be
taken). One of the other effects of such a change is to give actual bards a
slight edge in many of the same tasks, as it probabaly should be.

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]

----- Original Message -----
From: "daniel mcsorley" <mcsorley@CIS.OHIO-STATE.EDU>
Sent: Friday, February 28, 2003 11:50 AM


addressing Michael Romes
> Do you have Brecht fighters give up heavy armor prof in exchange for
> another feat? This kind of min-max swapping isn`t desireably for a
> class-based game like 3e. If the game were pointbased, you might have
> something there, but it`s not.

IMC, I allow Brecht fighters to swap Heavy Armor Proficency for Expertice
instead. I do have Brecht nobility value the heavy armor as a special skill
of the mostly knightly members of their caste, but most Brecht are not
impressed.

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.

[Elrostar]

On the question of whether or not to allow nobles (or fighters) to choose between taking armour proficiency or some other feat:
You can't take heavy armour without medium. And you can't take medium without heavy. It's somewhat silly to assume that because a noble knight tends to wear plate or chain that he's not adept at wearing lighter armour? That's (presumably) the reasoning behind having the lighter armour profs as prereqs for the heavier ones.

If we were going to make this a point based system, then it makes a lot of sense to break everything down like this. But d20 is not pointbased, unless one uses the Mutants & Masterminds rules, which I've generally heard very good things about, although I don't know well it adapts to a fantasy setting with magic use etc.

I guess what I feel is that the fighter is the consumate warrior. If he wants to choose to emphasise lighter armour and fighting styles, then there are prestige classes for that. But it strikes me as odd that a fighter wouldn't be proficient in any normal type of armour. Especially if they're possibly knights. Even Brecht knights go for heavy armour. It kind of comes in handy, really...

I think it's logical to give Nobles proficiency with all armour as well, if they're going to be somewhat warrior-like nobles. The class in WoT has proficiency with all martial weapons and all armour, which seems to make perfect sense to me. My only gripe with that class is that one of the main features of it is the ability to call in favours, gaining one every two levels. I'd prefer it if things like that were roleplayed out, and so I'd want to replace that benefit with something like better skill points, or (as people have suggested) some sort of class ability reflecting their being steeped in knowledge of royalty or nobility (although that could perhaps be managed by simply giving them a skill focus feat in that as a starting character?).

Anyway, enough from me for now. Just wanted to throw in a couple cents...

Elrostar

[Dantain]

Ken has the long and short of it, I could see a noble being able to have a catch all for nobility type things (suddenly realzing the three golden bees next to black hart puts so-and-so in the Bellam side of the family that always supported the Black Baron, for instance), that are too ill defined for the current knowledge skills.

The Bardic music is another one I saw as a nice...template type thing, if we altered it to say a...diplomacy or leadership check as opposed to a perform check.

As for most of it, www.dndworld.com/3e/classes/classconstruction.pdf (http://here) is a link to a copy of the classconstruction egine, I have a minor disagreements with it, but its good for establishing a rough idea on power levels.

About the noble and the +1 BAB/level. I included the cost for that as much because several members here were implying they wanted that. I'm opposed not becuase I don't see the noble being as good baseline fighter as a fighter (the bab only mind you), but because of the potential for feat abuse, a level 2 fighter/level 1 noble would have 3bonus feats before human and standard feats are accounted for. I actually don't think it would be too far a miss to push the first bonuse feat back to say...second level or so, but ymmv

[anacreon]

There's a noble class in the Wheel of Time Roleplaying Game book, that already operates in d20 system. It might need some adjustements, as not all the concepts of that game are identicle to D&D, but I think this can easily be made.

[Dantain]

Originally posted by anacreon


There's a noble class in the Wheel of Time Roleplaying Game book, that already operates in d20 system. It might need some adjustements, as not all the concepts of that game are identicle to D&D, but I think this can easily be made.

Actually, you would have remove Defense Adjustments, and then find something to add to the class (Armsmen, the WoT equilvant of Fighters get 1feat/2levels starting at second, so something equal to a feat). Also, I am not sure if WoT Nobles = BR nobles, in Wheel of Time, the noble is more akin to the fall of the roman empire time, not Middle/Reiancse times. It is a nice class, and offers nice features...but *shrugs*.

[Fizz]

In case no one has seen it, the Sovereign Stone Campaign Sourcebook has a Noble class that might be workable for Birthright.
It can be found here:
http://www.sstone.org/classes/noble.php

-Fizz

[Eosin the Red]

>>>>> There`s a noble class in the Wheel of Time Roleplaying Game book, that already operates in d20 system. It might need some adjustements, as not all the concepts of that game are identicle to D&D, but I think this can easily be made.[/quote]

>>>>>> Actually, you would have remove Defense Adjustments, and then find something to add to the class (Armsmen, the WoT equilvant of Fighters get 1 feat/2levels starting at second, so something equal to a feat). Also, I am not sure if WoT Nobles = BR nobles, in Wheel of Time, the noble is more akin to the fall of the roman empire time, not Middle/Reiancse times. It is a nice class, and offers nice features...but *shrugs*.


While I agree with the front, that last part has stumped me. WoT is about as Renaissance as you get (IMO). Why would you say it was imperial? There has not been an empire in over a thousand years and it only survived during the lifetime of the man who forged it.

I also think the Woodsman should be brought into BR and leave the Ranger class to the elves.

One final note on classes - I have been considering how to best represent (largely) non-magical Bards, ala 1st ed but have yet to find anything that struck my fancy. IMO the magic using bards should also be restricted to elves (and rare humans) and a non-magical variant should be for humans. Any suggestions as to where such a critter might dwell?

Heck, might as well add this:
A skeleton of my home brew (Anuire) rules on races and classes, most common to least common:
Commoner - unchanged
Warrior - unchanged
Expert - unchanged
Fighter - +2 skill points
Rogue - Bonus 1st level feat
Noble (SW, rev) - HD d8, skills per wot noble.
Woodsman (wot) - unchanged.
non-magical Bard (unknown) - ????
Wizard - +2 skill points - replaces magician. Limited spells to be found, all spells in book need to be researched.
Cleric - +2 skill points
Barbarian - unchanged (vos/rjuvik/goblin only)
spellsong (Bard) - +2 skill points (elf only)
Druid - +2 skill points
Paladin - +2 skill points (human only - multiclass encouraged)
Ranger - +2 skill points (elf only)
Sorcerer - +2 Skill points, 1 feat each 5 levels. Primary mage class. CoS acts as spell pool. (maybe 30 not mentioned in source books)
Witch (GR) - +2 skill points (2nd swamp mage and Mad Maeve).
Necromancer (GR) - +2 skill points (the lost).
Monk - verboten


I have not decided what the Sword Mage and the Eyeless One are but they will not be standard classes.

The races are done in a WoT standard, I have split Anuire into 8 regions (South Coast, West Coast, Heartlands, Eastern March, Northern March, Goblins, Elves, Dwarves) and have finished 3 of them. Someone recommended a +1 for redundant class skills and that seemed like a good rule to me.

The mages will have a little more WoT feel to them and the world will have a little more GRR Martin feel to it.

For the bloodlines I will use Gary`s brand spankin new conversion and for Domain actions I will use the new BR.net actions.

I include a variant (d20 Modern) death from massive damage ruling (Damage >CON + PC levels = save vs. DC 15 or reduced to -1 HP and dying.). This makes even skilled NPC classes easy to kill and makes mages far more dangerous.

I basically nerfed all magic items – I use masterwork, masterpiece, and have some properties for special metals. Most magic items are one of a kind, usually heirlooms or legendary items. Sometimes a weapon or item can be blessed in specific circumstances (using the skull of Fitzlan as a chalice could be a relic of great good or great evil). It is much easier to create evil items than it is to create good one (sacrifice a beautiful woman to create a wand of charm person).

I guess that that is as far as I have gotten into the DOC but my effort has been to use d20 to reproduce the same EFFECT as 2e BR - after looking at some of the stuff already done (which does what it set out to do. Not knocking the book.) - I do not believe a strait conversion really gets the correct feel for me. The domain stuff looks good, but the character classes, races, and magic items still feel way too high magic/D&D for my taste.

Wow, that was a ramble :)

************************************************** **************************
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: "Fizz" <brnetboard@TUARHIEVEL.ORG>
Sent: Monday, March 03, 2003 5:53 PM


> In case no one has seen it, the Sovereign Stone Campaign Sourcebook
> has a Noble class that might be workable for Birthright.
> It can be found here:
> http://www.sstone.org/classes/noble.php

I`ve mentioned the Soveriegn Stone CS (I have adapted its magic system for
my divine spellcasters), but I think their noble is a bit underpowered. One
could add more charisma features (the Gossip skill, aka bardic knowledge for
nobles; taking 20 on Sense Motive, &c) or one could add combat ability.
Given the constant warfare and political disorder of Cerilia, the humanoid
realms, and the pirates, I view the Soveriegn Stone noble as a bit too
genteel.

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.

[Dantain]

Originally posted by Eosin the Red

While I agree with the front, that last part has stumped me. WoT is about as Renaissance as you get (IMO). Why would you say it was imperial? There has not been an empire in over a thousand years and it only survived during the lifetime of the man who forged it.

I feel it is more similar to post Roman europe than renaissance, as the following conditions:
1. The strenght of rulers are decreasing (q.v. Andor and the Two Rivers)
2. Feudalism is not done (Lesser Lords do not have serfs)
3. Army Formations are loose rather than structured
4. Ill defined national borders, more land not belonging to a nation than does.
Technological, they are more similar to renaissance, but culutrally they are most similar to Post Roman europe.


I also think the Woodsman should be brought into BR and leave the Ranger class to the elves.

Yes. I agree, I think adding favored enmies would do fine to counter balance the defensive loss.


One final note on classes - I have been considering how to best represent (largely) non-magical Bards, ala 1st ed but have yet to find anything that struck my fancy. IMO the magic using bards should also be restricted to elves (and rare humans) and a non-magical variant should be for humans. Any suggestions as to where such a critter might dwell?

Hmmm....no, sadly, all the fixes I have seen for Bards make them more magical


Heck, might as well add this:
A skeleton of my home brew (Anuire) rules on races and classes, most common to least common:
Commoner - unchanged
Warrior - unchanged
Expert - unchanged
Fighter - +2 skill points
Rogue - Bonus 1st level feat
Noble (SW, rev) - HD d8, skills per wot noble.
Woodsman (wot) - unchanged.
non-magical Bard (unknown) - ????
Wizard - +2 skill points - replaces magician. Limited spells to be found, all spells in book need to be researched.
Cleric - +2 skill points
Barbarian - unchanged (vos/rjuvik/goblin only)
spellsong (Bard) - +2 skill points (elf only)
Druid - +2 skill points
Paladin - +2 skill points (human only - multiclass encouraged)
Ranger - +2 skill points (elf only)
Sorcerer - +2 Skill points, 1 feat each 5 levels. Primary mage class. CoS acts as spell pool. (maybe 30 not mentioned in source books)
Witch (GR) - +2 skill points (2nd swamp mage and Mad Maeve).
Necromancer (GR) - +2 skill points (the lost).
Monk - verboten

Looks kind of intresting, but I am leery of adding anything to the rouge, they will naturaly shine in the BR world as it is.


I have not decided what the Sword Mage and the Eyeless One are but they will not be standard classes.

The races are done in a WoT standard, I have split Anuire into 8 regions (South Coast, West Coast, Heartlands, Eastern March, Northern March, Goblins, Elves, Dwarves) and have finished 3 of them. Someone recommended a +1 for redundant class skills and that seemed like a good rule to me.

The mages will have a little more WoT feel to them and the world will have a little more GRR Martin feel to it.

For the bloodlines I will use Gary`s brand spankin new conversion and for Domain actions I will use the new BR.net actions.

I include a variant (d20 Modern) death from massive damage ruling (Damage >CON + PC levels = save vs. DC 15 or reduced to -1 HP and dying.). This makes even skilled NPC classes easy to kill and makes mages far more dangerous.

I don't like that aspect of D20 Modern, because its easy to get damages that exceed 20 odd points with magic, but without a crit its harder on to do physically, It makes magic more deadly, while not aiding the fighting classes, creating an inhernat unbalance (meaning the wizards take a promiance even in the lower levels). I do like the Grim and Gritty rules for D20, and have thought about implenting them to BR, but with modfications to the magic system over all.


I basically nerfed all magic items – I use masterwork, masterpiece, and have some properties for special metals. Most magic items are one of a kind, usually heirlooms or legendary items. Sometimes a weapon or item can be blessed in specific circumstances (using the skull of Fitzlan as a chalice could be a relic of great good or great evil). It is much easier to create evil items than it is to create good one (sacrifice a beautiful woman to create a wand of charm person).
I find that the lower number of spellcasters automatically creates a lower number of magic items, then I just create unique effects for the items, and name them.


I guess that that is as far as I have gotten into the DOC but my effort has been to use d20 to reproduce the same EFFECT as 2e BR - after looking at some of the stuff already done (which does what it set out to do. Not knocking the book.) - I do not believe a strait conversion really gets the correct feel for me. The domain stuff looks good, but the character classes, races, and magic items still feel way too high magic/D&D for my taste.

Wow, that was a ramble :)



I actually like what they have done for the most part, I think the Majority of BR campaigns out there can retain their feel with the new rules. Even things I was leery about in the beginning (humans losing attribute bonuses) they won me over with, as I read the manual.

[ConjurerDragon]

Eosin the Red wrote:

>A skeleton of my home brew (Anuire) rules on races and classes, most common to least common:
>Commoner - unchanged
>Warrior - unchanged
>Expert - unchanged
>Fighter - +2 skill points
>Rogue - Bonus 1st level feat
>Noble (SW, rev) - HD d8, skills per wot noble.
>Woodsman (wot) - unchanged.
>non-magical Bard (unknown) - ????
>Wizard - +2 skill points - replaces magician. Limited spells to be found, all spells in book need to be researched.
>Cleric - +2 skill points
>Barbarian - unchanged (vos/rjuvik/goblin only)
>spellsong (Bard) - +2 skill points (elf only)
>Druid - +2 skill points
>Paladin - +2 skill points (human only - multiclass encouraged)
>Ranger - +2 skill points (elf only)
>Sorcerer - +2 Skill points, 1 feat each 5 levels. Primary mage class. CoS acts as spell pool. (maybe 30 not mentioned in source books)
>Witch (GR) - +2 skill points (2nd swamp mage and Mad Maeve).
>Necromancer (GR) - +2 skill points (the lost).
>Monk - verboten
>
Something not to forget after that list of classes: Only few people in
Cerilia have anything besides Commoner and Expert which could easily be
forgotten by that list.

>I have not decided what the Sword Mage and the Eyeless One are but they will not be standard classes.
>
I would suggest the Acolyte of the Skin (Tome&Blood) for the Sword Mage.
He conceals his appearance, he is a brute from Vosgaard and he summons
fiends... ;-)

>I basically nerfed all magic items - I use masterwork, masterpiece, and have some properties for special metals. Most magic items are one of a kind, usually heirlooms or legendary items. Sometimes a weapon or item can be blessed in specific circumstances (using the skull of Fitzlan as a chalice could be a relic of great good or great evil). It is much easier to create evil items than it is to create good one (sacrifice a beautiful woman to create a wand of charm person).
>
Perhaps not sooo evil. Some strains of Nymph´s hair should do it, or
not? Have you read the short-story in Dragon Magazine?
bye
Michael Romes

************************************************** **************************
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 nerfingthe bard: entertainer have the same relationship to true bards as
maggicians and scholars have to wizards or warriors to fighters - they do
similiar things, but are not as good at them. In the case of the bard, I`d
say you could make a good entertainer out of the Expert class. Of course,
like the wizard and (in my opinion) the magician, these are NPC classes and
not PC-worthy. But I see no need for two different grades of bards - either
you are a flull bard (use the class and spellsong magic) or you are an
entertainer (use the Expert class).

/Carl


__________________________________________________ ___
Gå före i kön och få din sajt värderad på nolltid med Yahoo! Express
Se mer på: http://se.docs.yahoo.com/info/express/help/index.html

************************************************** **************************
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]

Stephen Starfox wrote:

>On nerfingthe bard: entertainer have the same relationship to true bards as
>maggicians and scholars have to wizards or warriors to fighters - they do
>similiar things, but are not as good at them. In the case of the bard, I`d
>say you could make a good entertainer out of the Expert class. Of course,
>like the wizard and (in my opinion) the magician, these are NPC classes and
>not PC-worthy. But I see no need for two different grades of bards - either
>you are a flull bard (use the class and spellsong magic) or you are an
>entertainer (use the Expert class).
>/Carl
>
The need would there for those that
a) want to play a bard that is worth playing and not only an "NPC"-class
and
B) do not want the Birthright Bard become a minor healer - instead want
the Bard to be as restricted in spells as in the Birthright 2E rulebook
(similar to the Magician).
bye
Michael Romes

************************************************** **************************
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.

[Eosin the Red]

>>>> I include a variant (d20 Modern) death from massive damage ruling
(Damage >CON + PC levels = save vs. DC 15 or reduced to -1 HP and dying.).
This makes even skilled NPC classes easy to kill and makes mages far more
dangerous.

>>> I don`t like that aspect of D20 Modern, because its easy to get damages
that exceed 20 odd points with magic, but without a crit its harder on to do
physically, It makes magic more deadly, while not aiding the fighting
classes, creating an inhernat unbalance (meaning the wizards take a
promiance even in the lower levels). I do like the Grim and Gritty rules for
D20, and have thought about implenting them to BR, but with modfications to
the magic system over all.


Actually, when you get rid of the overwhelming majority of magic items and
ability boosters (the Buffers are gone from my spell lists) it makes
fighting deadly but not overly so for the PCs - those without PC classes
basically become THUGs, some highly skilled and deadly but they still can`t
take a pounding. In my long runnning WoT game damage only got to 1d10+6 at
7th level. It took a crit to bring down the butch fighterers, who could
usually make the save without breaking a sweat.

It does tip the scale towards magic, but since I only have mages mentioned
in the books and about 30-40 others in all of Anuire, it does not bother me
much.

G&G becomes a tank-fest. I do like the rules and once considered using them
but a few testing of the system ended up with everybody strapping on the
biggest meanest armor available or running from combat. Anywhoo, thanks for
the input.

Eosin

************************************************** **************************
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.

[Eosin the Red]

> On nerfingthe bard: entertainer have the same relationship to true bards
as
> maggicians and scholars have to wizards or warriors to fighters - they do
> similiar things, but are not as good at them. In the case of the bard, I`d
> say you could make a good entertainer out of the Expert class. Of course,
> like the wizard and (in my opinion) the magician, these are NPC classes
and
> not PC-worthy. But I see no need for two different grades of bards -
either
> you are a flull bard (use the class and spellsong magic) or you are an
> entertainer (use the Expert class).

Unfortunately my looking has discovered that there is much truth in your
statement. I want a PC Bard that is largely non-magical but not a PrC and I
do not think such a critter exists. I may decide to go the way of the
Gleeman but that class was disappointing to me.

Thanks for the input.

Eosin the Red

************************************************** **************************
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.

[Dantain]

Maybe if you give a feat 1/3 levels, to replace the magic it would work?

[Dantain]

Originally posted by Eosin the Red

Actually, when you get rid of the overwhelming majority of magic items and
ability boosters (the Buffers are gone from my spell lists) it makes
fighting deadly but not overly so for the PCs - those without PC classes
basically become THUGs, some highly skilled and deadly but they still can`t
take a pounding. In my long runnning WoT game damage only got to 1d10+6 at
7th level. It took a crit to bring down the butch fighterers, who could
usually make the save without breaking a sweat.

Rouges also create a problem the +1d6 SA/2 levels in particular, by 5th level you have someone who is forcing saves out of people just by flanking, but if it works with your group, thats cool, I just tend to find problems with non high yield damage things in standard DnD


It does tip the scale towards magic, but since I only have mages mentioned
in the books and about 30-40 others in all of Anuire, it does not bother me
much.

They were my biggest problem with it, to be more exact magic missile and fireball


G&G becomes a tank-fest. I do like the rules and once considered using them
but a few testing of the system ended up with everybody strapping on the
biggest meanest armor available or running from combat. Anywhoo, thanks for
the input.

Agreed.