Atlas Project 2: Npc Stats

[Raesene Andu]

As part of the Atlas of Cerilia project, there will be full descriptions and stats for a variety of major NPCs, basically all those regent who are marked down as not recommended for players will have a full description and everyone else will have something similar to what was done in the original material.

The reasoning behind this is quite simple. NPC are meant to be the PC's opponents, so their stats are important. Everyone else is a possible PC regent, so it is up to the DM or player to create their stats.

From Anuire the following NPC regent will have full stats.
The Spider (Awnsheghlien Fighter 13, see Blood Enemies book)
Aeric Boeruine (Anuirean Fighter 12)
Rhuobhe Manslayer (Awnsheghlien Fighter 16/Sorcerer 13)
Darien Avan (Anuirean Noble 6/Fighter 3)
Gavin Tael (Anuirean Fighter 9)
Daeric Mhoried (Anuirean Fighter 2/Ranger 5)
Caliedhe Dosiere (Anuirean Noble 4/Wizard 16)
The Gorgon (see BRCS)
The Hand of Azrai (Vos Cleric 16)
The Eyeless One (?? Wizard 9)
Godar Thurinson (Dwarven Fighter 6)
Razzik Fanggrabber (Goblin Fighter 4)
Tie'skar Graecher (Goblin Fighter 7)
Kral Two-Toes (Goblin Priest 6)
Mheallie Bireon (Anuirean Rogue 8)
The Chimaera (Awnsheghlien Wizard 13)
Jaison Raenech (Anuirean Fighter 7)

So if you would like your chance to help out with the Atlas of Cerilia, here it is. I'll set the due date for any submission as the end of the month. All submissions are to be using the 3.5 rules (download the SRD if you don't have them).

As before all submission are to either be posted on this thread or sent directly to dmdarkstar@yahoo.com

[Raesene Andu]

Oh, and I almost forgot. To keep everything simple, I'd like all submissions to be in the following format (taken from the submissions to dungeon document). The final format may vary somewhat, but this version has all the information that will make it into the final Atlas. A description of the character (3-5 paragraphs only) may also be included, but this is optional.

Classed creature’s or NPC’s name, [Gender] [Race] [Class abbreviation
& level]: CR #; [Size] [type] [(subtype)]; HD #d# [(creature kind)] plus
#d# [(class abbreviation)]; or (for NPC) #d#; hp #; Init #; Spd # ft.[, second
movement mode # ft. ([maneuverability for aerial movement]); AC #,
touch #, flat-footed # [[AC modifiers]]; Atk +# melee [(weapon stats,
attack type)] or +# ranged [(weapon stats, attack type)]; Face/Reach [if
other than 5 ft. by 5 ft./5 ft.]; SA [Short descriptions of special attacks,
complex descriptions go under Special Attacks]; SQ [Short descriptions
of special abilities, complex descriptions go under Special Qualities]; SR
#; AL [alignment abbreviation]; SV Fort +#, Ref +#, Will +#; Str #, Dex #,
Con #, Int #, Wis #, Cha #.

Skills and Feats:List skills in alphabetical order and provide the skill
modifier (in the form +#) for each one. Modifiers that apply in special
circumstances are explained in parentheses immediately after the base
modifier. List feats in alphabetical order after skills, separating this list
from the skill list with a period.

Special Ability name or Special Quality name (Ex/Su/Sp): description
of appropriate ability or quality here. Separate each special ability
or special quality into a new paragraph, as is done in the Monster
Manualentries.

Possessions:[Items worn or carried].

Physical Description:(if significant) [Details about appearance]
Spells Prepared(#/#/#; base DC = # + spell level): 0—[cantrip, cantrip
(2)]; 1st—[first, first;] 2nd—[second].

OR (if cleric)

Spells Prepared(#/#/#; base DC = # + spell level): 0—[orison, orison
(2)]; 1st—[first*, first;] 2nd—[second*, second].
*Domain spell. Domains: [Domain (granted power); Domain (granted
power)].

OR

Spells Known(#/#/#; base DC = # + spell level): 0—[cantrip, cantrip];
1st—[first, first]; 2nd—[second].

AND (with Spells Prepared)

Spellbook:0—[cantrip, cantrip , cantrip, cantrip, cantrip]; 1st—[first,
first, first, first]; 2nd—[second, second, second]; 3rd—[third, third, third].

Example:

Skurge Dwarfbane, Male Troll Bbn3: CR 8; Large Giant; HD 6d6+36
(troll) plus 3d12+18 (Bbn); hp 101; Init +6; Spd 40 ft.; AC 18, touch 11,
flat-footed 16 [[+7 natural, +2 Dex, –1 size]]; Atk +12 melee (1d6+6, 2
claws), +7 melee (1d6+3, bite) or +12/+7 melee (1d12+9/x3, greataxe) or
+12/+7 melee (1d10+9 subdual, large sap); Face/Reach 5 ft. by 5 ft./10 ft.;

SA rage, rend; SQ uncanny dodge, regeneration, scent (detects living
creatures within 30 ft.); AL CN; SV Fort +14, Ref +3, Will +5; Str 23, Dex
14, Con 23, Int 6, Wis 10, Cha 6. Height 8 ft.

Skills: Jump +8, Listen +5, Spot +5. Feats: Alertness, Improved
Initiative, Iron Will.

Rage (Ex):During his rage, Skurge has the following statistics instead
of those given above: +18 hp, AC 16 (touch 9, flat-footed 14); Atk
+14/+14/+9 melee (1d6+8, 2 claws; 1d6+4, bite) or +11 melee
(1d12+12/x3, greataxe) or +11 melee (1d10+12 subdual, large sap); SV Fort
+16, Will +7; Str 27, Con 27. Skills: Jump +10. The rage lasts 11 rounds,
after which time the troll is fatigued. Skurge can rage once per day.

Rend (Ex): If a troll hits with both claw attacks, it latches onto the
opponent’s body and tears the flesh. This attack automatically deals an
additional 2d6+9 points of damage.

Regeneration (Ex): Fire and acid deal normal damage to a troll. If a
troll loses a limb or body part, the lost portion regrows in 3d6 minutes.
The creature can reattach the severed member instantly by holding it to
the stump.

Possessions:Greataxe with three gems embedded in the handle (500
gp, 100 gp, and 50 gp respectively), large leather sack containing six severed
dwarf heads (can be used as a large sap, inflicting 1d10+9 points of
subdual damage).

[Osprey]

Spells prepared? Under what circumstances? Political? Adventuring? The most likely situation PC's will find them in?

[irdeggman]

It might be better to present the major NPCs in a tactics round by round format like that used in the 3.5 MM for the significant monsters. For example (from MM, Demon- Balor)

Tactics Round by Round
Prior to combat: Unholy aura
Round 1: Fire Storm or implosion and quickened telekinesis, or summon additional demons. If the balor does not deem itself seriously threatened, it conserves abilities usable only once per day and uses blaphemy instead.
Round 2: Insanity or power word stun
Round 3: Full melee attack with weapon, including entangle with whip
Round 4: Teleport or fly away with entangled foe to reestablish range; repeat round 1 and continue

A balor who wants to drive off or neutralize a party without slaying its foes avoids lethal attack.
Prior to combat: Unholy aura
Round 1: Dominate monster
Round 2: Pwer word stun
Round 3: Insanity or telekinesis to incapacitate or repel a dangerous opponent
Round 4: Teleport or fly away to reestablish range; repeat round 1 and continue

[Osprey]

It might be better to present the major NPCs in a tactics round by round format like that used in the 3.5 MM for the significant monsters.

Is all of that really necessary to be included in the Atlas? I for one prefer not to have standardized, predictable behavior from NPC's, especially when players might be reading the descriptions (whether they should be or not). Writing up specifics like that really takes away a DM's creativity and encourages thinking within a generic box.

If all the other stats are written up for a PC, is it really unreasonable to expect a DM to write out a spell list based on the adventure situation?

I think it's important to keep a resource like the Atlas somewhat flexible and open-ended in this sense. If a module-type adventure were being published, that would be a different situation. There you have story context in which to base spell lists, tactics, etc.

In the Atlas, I think a character description should suffice as a set of guidelines for a DM thinking about tactics. The "round-by-round tactics" seems more like a "how to" guide for dealing with power gamers by min-maxxing the NPC's. Combat starts looking like a D&D computer game at that point, with the monsters providing repetitive, somewhat predictable challenges. I'd rather not see Birthright go the way of the Munchkin.

Osprey

[Fearless_Leader]

I have to say that I agree with Osprey on this. The round by round canned tactics seem very munchkinish to me and I for one wouldn't even use them.
If that's the way things are dealt with in the new 3.5 edition, I have to say that that's just one more reason for me not to invest the $90 in a whole new set of rules that are only somewhat different than 3E.

[DanMcSorley]

On Mon, 15 Sep 2003, irdeggman wrote:

> It might be better to present the major NPCs in a tactics round by round

> format like that used in the 3.5 MM for the significant monsters. For

> example (from MM, Demon- Balor)



You`re kidding, right? These are the peers of the PCs, to be schemed

against and competed with, not to be Buff-Scried-Teleported and smacked

down.



--

Daniel McSorley

[Vallariel]

A Dm can change whatever he needs to, to fit in his campaign. I, (as either DM or player) for one, prefer Stats and Spells to work from. I don't usually follow all the things presented, but I like to have the original to work from...
I think its a good reminder (direction) of how things should be as the base (the intention of the NPC's role in Birthright for example)... and allows more time for creativity. (If you have a few hours to work on a character, you can spend it on his stats and skills or you can spend it bringing him to life by writing up his motivations, passions, hates and yearnings. Not to mention fleshing out his travels, his bastards, his hobbies.....)
For both PC's and NPC's.
Which, I think, leads to a more interesting game.

Allthough, listing all the spells per round like:

Tactics Round by Round
Prior to combat: Unholy aura
Round 1: Fire Storm or implosion and quickened telekinesis, or summon additional demons. If the balor does not deem itself seriously threatened, it conserves abilities usable only once per day and uses blaphemy instead.
Round 2: Insanity or power word stun
Round 3: Full melee attack with weapon, including entangle with whip
Round 4: Teleport or fly away with entangled foe to reestablish range; repeat round 1 and continue
Seems a bit obsessive to me....

[Eosin]

This is for gee whiz - but it is a write up that I have on hand and could easily be morphed into someone else. The PrC is from Dynasties and Demagouges.

Chamberlain Dosiere, human male Aris 5/ Ftr 2/ Politician 10; HD 10d4 + 5d8 + 2d10 + 16; hp 71; Init +0; Spd 30 ft.; AC 10; Atk +12/+7 (1d8 + 5 Throneguard); SA Aura of Power, Blooded, Compelling Promise, Matching Speech, Personal Touch, Public Appeal, Public Support, Quid Pro Quo, Satisfying Ambiguity, Seniority, Sense of the Room; SV Fort +8, Ref +7, Will +14; Str 12, Dex 11, Con 12, Int 16, Wis 15, Cha 19

Skills: Administration +11, Appraise +7, Bluff +14, Climb +4, Diplomacy +20, Gather Information +13, Intimidate +9, Jump +4, KS: Arcana +6, KS: Architecture +5, KS: Blood Lore +6, KS: Geography +10, KS: History +11, KS: Law +13, KS: Local +12, KS: Religion +8, Lead +12, Listen +2, Perform (Music) +7, Perform (Oratory) +15, Ride +7, Sense Motive +13, Spot +2, Swim +5, Warcraft +8

Feats: Alertness, Commanding Voice, Inspired Leader, Information Network, Leadership, Mounted Combat, Skill Focus – Diplomacy, Weapon Focus – Long Sword. (Need one more).

Aura of power (Su): Any character who can see and hear Dosiere must make a Will save (DC 29) to voice disagreement with him or to disobey his direct commands while in his presence. This is a mind affecting, charm-like power.

Compelling Promise: Dosiere gains a +2 influence bonus to Diplomacy checks when he makes a promise to be fulfilled later. He is not required to fulfill the promise but frequent failure will result in a penalty as he develops a reputation for empty promises.

Matching Speech: Dosiere inspires confidence and trust by speaking in the same manner as the person he is trying to influence. This grants him a +2 reaction bonus to Bluff, Diplomacy, Intimidate and Perform (Oratory) checks.

Personal Touch: When Dosiere greets someone, he may make a KS: Local check (DC 15) to remember a flattering detail about them. If he succeeds at this check, he may bring it up to gain a +2 bonus to a single Bluff, Diplomacy, or Sense Motive check.

Public Appeal: Once per day, Dosiere may compel an audience of up to 500 people to perform a simple, non-violent task for him. He must speak to the audience for at least 10 minutes and must succeed at a Perform (Oratory) check (DC 25).

Public Support: Dosiere can rally the people to his cause. He must speak with an audience for 30 minutes. He must succeed at a Perform (Oratory) check (DC 15 +1 for each 100 members in the audience). If he succeeds, he gains a +1 competence bonus for each 100 members of the audience. He may use the bonus for any one Bluff, Diplomacy, Intimidate, or Perform (Oratory) check on any matter on which the opinion of the Audience has any bearing. He must use this bonus within 24 hours of receiving it.

Sense of the Room: Dosiere may make a Sense Motive check (DC 18) to learn the needs and goals of a group of people. Each attempt requires ten minutes of conversation with the members of the group. If the check is successful, he understands what each person hopes to accomplish and why.

Need to figure his sword and listed items into the mix.

[Osprey]

Are all of Dosiere's powers based on the politician class? I take it that is a prestige class, yeah? Dynasties and Demagogues? What is that?

Osprey

[Raesene Andu]

Should quickly make the point that all characters should use classes and prestige classes availible in the core rulebooks only (as most people have a copy, or can download SRD).

Prestiges classes from other product, while they may fit the character, can't be used because not everyone has that product. I personally, only have the core rulebooks and 2 other books and I imagine there are a lot of other people out there in a similar sitution.

[kgauck]

----- Original Message -----

From: "Eosin" <brnetboard@BIRTHRIGHT.NET>

Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2003 4:41 PM





> Chamberlain Dosiere, human male Aris 5/ Ftr 2/ Politician 10



When I find myself giving a character like this Ftr 2, I try to remember to

step back and ask why. Is this the underpowered aristocrat from the DMG, so

the F2 adds some feats? Otherwise, the only difference is the exchange of a

+1 Will for a +3 Fort. Both an Ar7 and an Ar5/F2 have a +5 BAB. Since a

character must begin with Aristocrat, Dosiere started with access to all

simple and martial weapons and armors. So, why not just make him an

Aristocrat 7/ Politician 10?



You gave Dosiere a +14 Bluff, which I take means he has 10 or 14 ranks of

Bluff. My own thoughts on Bluff is that Anuireans are not good at bluff,

the pious are actually bad a bluffing, and that generally bluff is an

underused part of the Anuirean leader`s bag of tricks. One of the most

serious charges against honor would be to be called a liar, and bluffing is

just that. Putting aside claims of Dosiere as exceptional, its just not

typically something I attach to Anuireans of aristocratic or Haelynite

backround. Given Dosiere`s solid Diplomacy, Oratory, and Intimidate skills,

why would he bother with falsity, deception, and dishonorable speech?



Kenneth Gauck

kgauck@mchsi.com

[kgauck]

----- Original Message -----

From: "Raesene Andu" <brnetboard@BIRTHRIGHT.NET>

Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2003 10:07 PM



> Prestiges classes from other product, while they may fit the character,

> can`t be used because not everyone has that product.



While this obviously makes sense, abandoning Dynasties and Demagogues really

hurts. It is so very useful for games about politics.



Kenneth Gauck

kgauck@mchsi.com

[Eosin the Red]

Good point on the FTR to Aris move. I honestly can`t say why I went with the

FTR (he was written up shortly after the book came out). I suspect it was a

few feats to round out his combat. This is the underpowered Aris from the

DMG.



Bluff would also be used to conceal motive - something that the Chamberlain

must do on occasion. I do see your point though and had never thought of it.



PS Ospery: yes, all the stuff comes from the PrC Diplomat. This class is

found in Dynasties and Demagogues by Atlas.



Eosin





> > Chamberlain Dosiere, human male Aris 5/ Ftr 2/ Politician 10

>

> When I find myself giving a character like this Ftr 2, I try to remember

to

> step back and ask why. Is this the underpowered aristocrat from the DMG,

so

> the F2 adds some feats? Otherwise, the only difference is the exchange of

a

> +1 Will for a +3 Fort. Both an Ar7 and an Ar5/F2 have a +5 BAB. Since a

> character must begin with Aristocrat, Dosiere started with access to all

> simple and martial weapons and armors. So, why not just make him an

> Aristocrat 7/ Politician 10?

>

> You gave Dosiere a +14 Bluff, which I take means he has 10 or 14 ranks of

> Bluff. My own thoughts on Bluff is that Anuireans are not good at bluff,

> the pious are actually bad a bluffing, and that generally bluff is an

> underused part of the Anuirean leader`s bag of tricks. One of the most

> serious charges against honor would be to be called a liar, and bluffing

is

> just that. Putting aside claims of Dosiere as exceptional, its just not

> typically something I attach to Anuireans of aristocratic or Haelynite

> backround. Given Dosiere`s solid Diplomacy, Oratory, and Intimidate

skills,

> why would he bother with falsity, deception, and dishonorable speech?

>

> Kenneth Gauck

> kgauck@mchsi.com

>

>



>

> Birthright-l Archives:

http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html

>

>

[Osprey]

> Chamberlain Dosiere, human male Aris 5/ Ftr 2/ Politician 10

When I find myself giving a character like this Ftr 2, I try to remember to
step back and ask why. Is this the underpowered aristocrat from the DMG, so
the F2 adds some feats? Otherwise, the only difference is the exchange of a
+1 Will for a +3 Fort. Both an Ar7 and an Ar5/F2 have a +5 BAB. Since a
character must begin with Aristocrat, Dosiere started with access to all
simple and martial weapons and armors. So, why not just make him an
Aristocrat 7/ Politician 10?

You gave Dosiere a +14 Bluff, which I take means he has 10 or 14 ranks of
Bluff. My own thoughts on Bluff is that Anuireans are not good at bluff,
the pious are actually bad a bluffing, and that generally bluff is an
underused part of the Anuirean leader`s bag of tricks. One of the most
serious charges against honor would be to be called a liar, and bluffing is
just that. Putting aside claims of Dosiere as exceptional, its just not
typically something I attach to Anuireans of aristocratic or Haelynite
backround. Given Dosiere`s solid Diplomacy, Oratory, and Intimidate skills,
why would he bother with falsity, deception, and dishonorable speech?

Kenneth Gauck


First off, although your points abouit lying are well taken, it is simply a necessity of politics (especially politics in the Imperial Court) to be able to conceal one&#39;s motives. It&#39;s bad to be caught lying, but simply concealing the whole truth? Isn&#39;t Dossiere a master of manipulating people (like Avan and Boeruine)? Diplomacy will only get you so far if your motives are all clean and transparent. No, when dealing with the vipers snapping at the Imperial Throne, Dossiere would have worked on every trick in the book. Especially if he is a lot older than a normal human...

As for the Ar/Ftr thing...

The original (2e) Dossiere was a Fighter12/Diviner16. Did that just get tossed out the window? Now he&#39;s a pure beauracrat? Not nearly as interesting, IMO. His combination of magic and strong combat abilities made him a real bad-ass with a lot of tricks up his sleeves. I know you can&#39;t do a straight level conversion into 3e rules, but how DO you convert this kind of thing? Especially with dual classes, who are very similar to 3e multiclsses?

A simple solution for the Ari/Ftr thing is to trade them both off for the Noble class in the BRCS. This is basically the Aristocrat with a few bonus feats (1st, 4th, 8th levels, etc.) and a slightly better skill list to make them more viable as a PC class. As an 8th level Noble, Dossiere would have good fighting skills (BAB +6/+1, Simple & Martial Weapons, Light and Med. Armor) and 3 bonus feats to be chosen from a nice array of possibilities.

I think it would be good to use the BRCS stuff as part of the NPC stats in the Atlas, showing some consistency between the publications from BR.net.

Osprey

[Vallariel]

Originally posted by kgauck@Sep 16 2003, 08:42 PM

While this obviously makes sense, abandoning Dynasties and Demagogues really

hurts. It is so very useful for games about politics.



Who makes this book? I don&#39;t think I&#39;ve ever heard of it, or seen if for that matter...but I may have to get it.lol.
Karen

[geeman]

At 06:59 PM 9/17/2003 +0200, Osprey wrote:



>A simple solution for the Ari/Ftr thing is to trade them both off for the

>Noble class in the BRCS. This is basically the Aristocrat with a few

>bonus feats (1st, 4th, 8th levels, etc.) and a slightly better skill list

>to make them more viable as a PC class. As an 8th level Noble, Dossiere

>would have good fighting skills (BAB +6/+1, Simple & Martial Weapons,

>Light and Med. Armor) and 3 bonus feats to be chosen from a nice array of

>possibilities.



One of the things that always troubled me about the original BR texts was

the use of the fighter for so many characters that really should have had

levels in a noble PC class. I`d argue that almost all the regents (at

least a majority) of them described as fighters alone should have at least

some if not all of those levels in a noble PC class in a 3e/3.5 conversion

rather than trying to express them as the somewhat narrow 3e

fighters. Dossiere is IMO a prime example of this kind of character who

should have levels as a noble rather than a fighter.



Gary

[kgauck]

----- Original Message -----

From: "Osprey" <brnetboard@BIRTHRIGHT.NET>

Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 11:59 AM



> First off, although your points abouit lying are well taken, it is

> simply a necessity of politics to be able to conceal one`s motives.



Which can be done by keeping secrets. Discretion is one thing, lying is all

together different.



> It`s bad to be caught lying, but simply concealing the whole truth?



Doesn`t require bluffing, it requires not talking about your secrets.



> Isn`t Dossiere a master of manipulating people (like Avan and Boeruine)?

> Diplomacy will only get you so far if your motives are all clean and

> transparent.



This is what Machiavelli regards the the problem of the Lion and the Fox.

When I compare Brecht, Khinasi, and Anuirean, I see the Anuirean as most

feline and the Brecht as most lupine. In everyone`s politics these problems

will exist, the question is one of relative degree, Of all Cerilian people,

Anuireans are least likely to make recourse to Bluff and most likely to take

offence to catching someone bluffing. A truism of politics is that lying

works ... once. So, once Dosiere is caught in a lie he carries the prestige

of a guilder in the politics of the empire.



> No, when dealing with the vipers snapping at the Imperial Throne,

> Dossiere would have worked on every trick in the book. Especially

> if he is a lot older than a normal human...



Then as far as I am concerned, he is irrevant because no one pays any

attention to him. Either Dosiere has to be so good that he`s never caught,

and largely not even suspected, or he can`t use these tactics. To claim

that Avan and Boeruine aren`t worthy and then to do this kind of stuff is

the height of hypocracy. That`s not my view of the heart of the empire. I

rather see Dosiere as so unreasonably honor-bound that he would never be

satisfied with a human emperor.



> A simple solution for the Ari/Ftr thing is to trade them both off for

> the Noble class in the BRCS. This is basically the Aristocrat with

> a few bonus feats (1st, 4th, 8th levels, etc.)



Why have both? Since we need a viable class for such folks, why continue to

have an inferior NPC version of the class? The reason I specifically asked

about the "underpowered aristocrat from the DMG" was related to this. I

considered a version like the BRCS noble for my Aristocrat, but I felt that

fewer skills and more class features (I have 5 bonus feats to the BRCS` 6)

was they way to go.



http://home.mchsi.com/~kgauck/taelshore/aristocrat.htm



> I think it would be good to use the BRCS stuff as part of the NPC

> stats in the Atlas, showing some consistency between the publications

> from BR.net.



Ultimatly this is why I really can never think very seriously about

submitting anything.



Kenneth Gauck

kgauck@mchsi.com

[kgauck]

----- Original Message -----

From: "Vallariel" <brnetboard@BIRTHRIGHT.NET>

Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 12:26 PM





> Who makes this book? I don`t think I`ve ever heard of it, or seen

> if for that matter...but I may have to get it.lol.



See my review at BR.net at: http://www.birthright.net/read.php?TID=1679

posted on May 26, 2003



http://www.ogrecave.com/reviews/dyn_n_dem.shtml



http://www.rpg.net/reviews/archive/9/9340.phtml



Eosin announced the book on this list back in Dec 6, 02.



Kenneth Gauck

kgauck@mchsi.com

[Raesene Andu]

Ultimatly this is why I really can never think very seriously about
submitting anything.

Why not? I&#39;m not sure I understand your reasons here. Are you saying that because you don&#39;t want to submit anything to the Atlas project because you don&#39;t agree with some of the rules from the BRCS? Surely that is rather a spurious argument, by submitting material you help to guide the project in the direction you think it should go.

Remember the only reason the rules in the BRCS were writen the way they were was because those people willing to actually write for the project wrote them that way. If you don&#39;t like them, the write up an alternative and post it so everyone can read it and criticise it.

[Osprey]

Why have both? Since we need a viable class for such folks, why continue to
have an inferior NPC version of the class? The reason I specifically asked
about the "underpowered aristocrat from the DMG" was related to this. I
considered a version like the BRCS noble for my Aristocrat, but I felt that
fewer skills and more class features (I have 5 bonus feats to the BRCS` 6)
was they way to go.

http://home.mchsi.com/~kgauck/taelshore/aristocrat.htm


KGauck,
I checked out your Aristocrat class. It&#39;s interesting, and extensive. If I had my druthers, the BRCS would end up with a cross-breed between your idea and the current Noble class. The Noble has more skill points (6 base, as opposed to 4 in your class), which I definitely like. Also, the advantage of more feats does allow for more flexibility within the class, which I also like. On the other hand, one bonus feat every 4 levels IS pretty skimpy, IMO. But the inclusion of many political feats in the BRCS does make adding more bonus feats a very viable option for the Noble (1 every 3 levels seems like a better balance), especially if a list of possible bonus feats is created for them.

My only real hangup with your Aristocrat is the degree of detail in the class abilities is a bit overwhelming, and the application of things like "anything applying to the rule or welfare of the domain" is rather broad and open to a wide range of interpretation. It could lead to some very overpowered regents once those bonuses start stacking up. Converting some of those abilities into feats might not be a bad way to go, however.

Just some thoughts (and to let you know your work does not go unnoticed or unappreciated: there are a lot of good ideas in there&#33; :) ).

-Osprey

[kgauck]

----- Original Message -----

From: "Osprey" <brnetboard@BIRTHRIGHT.NET>

Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2003 1:13 PM





> I checked out your Aristocrat class. It`s interesting, and extensive.



Thanks for the comments. :-)



> The Noble has more skill points (6 base, as opposed to 4 in your

> class), which I definitely like.



I like fewer skill points and I compound that by increasing the number of

skills (Diplomacy gets broken up into Bargain for Rogues, Oratory for

Priests and Aristocrats, and Diplomacy for Aristocrats; Bards get all

three). Otherwise I`d end up just increasing DC`s. This way, published

DC`s are useful to me strait away, and I don`t dilute the influence of

intelligence.



> Also, the advantage of more feats does allow for more flexibility

> within the class, which I also like. On the other hand, one bonus

> feat every 4 levels IS pretty skimpy, IMO.



I like the large number of feats being special for the fighter. Its one of

the reasons I prefered lots of class features (many of which are

underpowered as lone feats). It made the Aristocrat more focused, and less

flexible than the fighter.



> My only real hangup with your Aristocrat is the degree of detail in

> the class abilities is a bit overwhelming, and the application of things

> like "anything applying to the rule or welfare of the domain" is rather

> broad and open to a wide range of interpretation.



I can`t find anything quite this broad. Even still, when you make up stuff

for your own use you can litteraly write "a bonus to some stuff" and keep it

balanced, but that`s not very transportable. Could you point out where I

was so broad? I could probabaly tighten up my meaning.



Kenneth Gauck

kgauck@mchsi.com

[Sir Justine]

The Spider (Awnsheghlien Fighter 13, see Blood Enemies book)
Aeric Boeruine (Anuirean Fighter 12)
Rhuobhe Manslayer (Awnsheghlien Fighter 16/Sorcerer 13)
Darien Avan (Anuirean Noble 6/Fighter 3)
Gavin Tael (Anuirean Fighter 9)
Daeric Mhoried (Anuirean Fighter 2/Ranger 5)
Caliedhe Dosiere (Anuirean Noble 4/Wizard 16)
The Gorgon (see BRCS)
The Hand of Azrai (Vos Cleric 16)
The Eyeless One (?? Wizard 9)
Godar Thurinson (Dwarven Fighter 6)
Razzik Fanggrabber (Goblin Fighter 4)
Tie&#39;skar Graecher (Goblin Fighter 7)
Kral Two-Toes (Goblin Priest 6)
Mheallie Bireon (Anuirean Rogue 8)
The Chimaera (Awnsheghlien Wizard 13)
Jaison Raenech (Anuirean Fighter 7)


What about the npc&#39;s levels? Will they stay in the same way they were on AD&D? (I can see that some have changed, but I guess its only the ones who were above 20th level.)
I ask this because I think there are some (some, not all&#33;) of the npcs that are underpowered, IMHO.
What hurts me most is basically Daeric Mhoried, with only 7 levels. I mean, he&#39;s the regent of the most "tough" of the anuirean realms (bordering the Gorgon&#39;s Crown, there would be no other option), and with 7 levels he won&#39;t be much respected.
Now, I now that the regent&#39;s levels aren&#39;t the only factor, but it&#39;s an important one.

...

D&D, and in its 3rd edition more than ever, doens&#39;t makes "fantasy heroes". It makes "fantasy super-heroes".
What I want to say is that characters get VERY powerful from medium to high levels. A fighter of about 10th level, could single-handed defeat a very large number of, let&#39;s say, 1st level soldiers (warriors). You might think not, but a group of high (+- 15) level could change the course of a war, ALONE - not using their political power, not using their armies, no - using their Base Attack Bonus, their high AC, and their three-digital Hit Points value. :(

One way that I see to decrease this problem is to actually increase the power of the npcs. Now you might think that this will only make all things to be over-powered, wich is surelly NOT the flavor of Birthright. But not. For example, IMC the "average" soldier is not a 1st level warrior. It is a 2nd level fighter (I don&#39;t use the DMG classes - I find ridiculous the concept of "common people" being weaker than "the PCs". I mean, PCs will already have higher atributes and higher levels, they don&#39;t need a better class). And in an army, at about every 10 soldiers there will be a sergeant (4th level fighter), at about every 20 soldiers there will be a lieutenant (6th level fighter) and so on... you get the piciture.

Now, one thing is to defeat 128 1st level warriors (you don&#39;t know how EASY is this in D&D...).
Other thing is to defeat 100 2nd level, 10 4th level, 5 6th level, and one 8th level (the captain?) fighters.
This kind of thing makes the PCs less powerful direct - now, if they want to defeat this army, they will need to use their political power, THEIR armies...

Well, this is just my opinion, and how I do in my campaign.

Now back to the NPCs, I think some of them could be a little more powerful, to be able to challenge the PCs. I mean, Darien Avan is described as one of the most cunning politicians of Anuire. Is one of the most cunning politicians just a noble 6? And what about the noble 7, the noble 8... (and I&#39;m not even talking about the noble 15, 16...)???
When the PCs reach 6th level, their political skills will be almost as good as those of the Prince, and they aren&#39;t even in the half way of the D&D power curve (10th level)&#33;

Of course, the DM could judge that just as the PCs advance in levels, the NPCs advance too.
This is what I have done in my last campaign.

Anyway, I will try to do one or more of these npcs and submit them, to try to help the Atlas&#33;

[Osprey]

What about the awnsheglien? You give their class levels, but not their monster levels. Where do those figure in?

-Osprey

[Osprey]

Jaison Raenech
Male Anuirean, Fighter 7, Lawful Evil; CR 7; Medium Humanoid; HD 7d10 + 30 (+14 Con, +16 regent bonus), hp 71; Init +1; Speed 20&#39; (Run 60&#39;); AC 21, touch 11; Attack: +14/+9 Melee (1d8+8, 19-20/x2, +3 longsword); Face/Reach: 5&#39;x5&#39;/5&#39;

SV: Fort +7, Ref +3, Will +3 (+7 vs. Charm)
Str 17, Dex 12, Con 14, Int 13, Wis 10, Cha 14, Bld 18.
Bloodline: Brenna, Major (18); Blood Abilities: Major Resistance: Charm (minor), Persuasion (major)

Skills: Lead +15, Intimidate +17, Ride +11, Warcraft +12
Feats: Anuirean Arms Training, Conqueror, Mounted Combat, Power Attack, Ride-By Attack, Skill Focus: Intimidate, Trample, Weapon Specialization: Longsword,

Major resistance: Charm (Su): Minor blood ability, grants +4 to saves vs. Charm/Enchantment effects.
Persuasion (Sp): Major blood ability, may cast suggestion once per day (DC 19).
Divine Aura (Sp): Grants +2 to Charisma-based skills. Once per day he may enthrall non-blooded creatures in a 50&#39; radius as a full-round action (DC 19).

Possessions: "Grandmark," the Sword of Osoerde: +3 Longsword, grants Divine Aura (major blood ability) to the wielder. This is the hereditary birthright of the Dukes of Osoerde, and was stolen from the former duke when Raenech murdered him and usurped the duchey. William Moergen would dearly love to reclaim this weapon.
Other items: masterwork full plate, large shield, heavy warhorse, potion of cure serious wounds (3d8+5), potion of invisibility. Raenech keeps the potion of invisibility in case he ever needs to flee an otherwise-fatal situation.

Appearance: Jaison Raenech is a well-built man in his early 30&#39;s, with well-groomed, short dark brown hair and mustache, stark facial features, and a dark, cruel gaze. His mouth seems to be set in an almost constant sneer. Raenech stands a full 6&#39; in height, and in full armor he is an extremely imposing figure. He uses this to good effect in nearly all social situations, as he prefers to intimidate both subordinates and fellow regents in order to keep the upper hand. His notorious cruelty is etched into his bearing and features, and he takes visible pleasure from the suffering of others, particularly those who have defied him or broken his laws.

[Eosin the Red]

Hello Ospery,



I tend to go with a little more skill versitility. This was my basic (from memory) build of him but sadly, he has joined his ansestors in my game. I pictured him as more of a lithe athletic sorta guy (balance, jump, climb, swim, & tumble).



PS - your build may be missing weapon focus (I think??).



Jaison Raenech, Male Human Ftr4/Rog3: HD 4d10 + 4 plus 3d6 + 3; hp 42; Init +6 (+2 dex, +4 Improved Inish); Move 30; AC 17 (+1 Chainshirt, + 2 Dex), touch 12, flat 15; BAB +6; Grap +8; Atk +13/+8 melee (1d8 + 8 Grandmark, long sword) SA evasion, sneak attack +2d6; AL LE; SV Fort +6, Ref +6, Will +3; Str 16, Dex 14, Con 13, Int 14, Wis 11, Cha 12, Bld 18



Skills: Balance +9 (5), Bluff +6 (5), Climb +9 (6), Escape Artist +7 (5), Hide +4 (3), Intimidate +6 (5), Jump +9 (6), Knowledge (Local) +4 (2), Knowledge (Nobility) +4 (2), Lead +6 (5), Ride +8 (6), Search +3 (2), Swim +5 (2), Tumble +9 (5), Warcraft +9 (5)



Feats: Improved Inish, Mounted Combat, Power Attack, Quick Draw, Skill Focus (Warcraft), Weapon Focus (Long Sword), Weapon Specialization (Long Sword).



Bloodline: Brenna, Major (18); Blood Abilities: Major Resistance: Charm (minor), Persuasion (major)Major resistance: Charm (Su): Minor blood ability, grants +4 to saves vs. Charm/Enchantment effects.

Persuasion (Sp): Major blood ability, may cast suggestion once per day (DC 19).

Divine Aura (Sp): Grants +2 to Charisma-based skills. Once per day he may

enthrall non-blooded creatures in a 50` radius as a full-round action (DC 19).



Possessions: “Grandmark”- the Sword of Osoerde: +3 longsword, grants Divine Aura (major blood ability) to the wielder. This is the hereditary birthright of the Dukes of Osoerde, and was stolen from the former duke when Raenech murdered him and usurped the duchy. William Moergen would dearly love to reclaim this weapon.

[Osprey]

PS - your build may be missing weapon focus (I think??).

Anuirean Arms training covers Weapon Focus: Longsword.

I was building him off of Raesene&#39;s original list (which pegs him as a Level 7 Fighter). However, I like your version, too, especially since he has a bloodline of Brenna.

I figured on the Intimidate skill focus because of the mention of his rulership style in Ruins of Empire: impalement and crucifiction are his favorite forms of punishment and making examples out of those who defy him. So I kinda&#39; ran with it.

[kgauck]

I`d make Jaison an Aristocrat 5/Fighter2.



Using the BRCS he`d have four bonus feats and four standard feats. He`d

have 52 skill ranks plus Int bonus. He could have all of Osprey`s feats

except Weapon Specialization, or all of Eosin`s feats, with a substitution

in place of Weapon Specialization. Since Osprey have him a +1 Int Mod, and

Eosin gave him a +2, he has at least a +1 for purposes of thsi discussion,

so I`ll assume he has a total of 62 skill ranks all together. I break the

ranks down as follows:



Administration 10, Appraise 5, Bluff 9, Diplomacy 5, Intimidate 9,

Knowledge (Law) 5, Knowledge (Nobility) 5, Ride 7, Sense Motive 7



A law holder simply must have Law 5 to be effective, a province holder must

have Nobility 5 to be effective. Some Adminsitration is essential.

Appraise and Sense Motive are neccesary to keep your household in line. The

Bluff, Diplomacy, and Intimidate collection is for getting his way in

politics, their arrangement reflects his emphisis.



If I used my own Aristocrat, he`d have 16 fewer skill points the same number

of feats plus the class features Leadership, Wealth, Rank, Title, Education,

and Noble Conduct.



Kenneth Gauck

kgauck@mchsi.com

[Osprey]

Honestly, I&#39;d keep Raenech&#39;s focus on the Fighter aspect. He&#39;s a usurper, originally a lieutenant to the old duke. And as of 551 MR, it doesn&#39;t seem like he&#39;s been duke for all that long, otherwise the situation with Moergen would probably be resolved. I figure he might have been minor nobility in Osoerde. But he has very militant attitudes in his style of rulership. Personally, Kenneth, I&#39;d go for something more like Fighter 5/ Noble2, keeping the militant focus. There are plenty of other Anuirean regents that I think would switch most of their fighter levels for Noble (or Aristocrat, if you like). Darien Avan being the prime example, and Hierl Diem another (I&#39;d be happy to make a Hierl Diem a straight Noble). Ghavin Tael and the Mhor are another set of regents that I&#39;d keep the fighter focus on, and even Aeric Boeruine.

Anuire may be heavily political, but it&#39;s also a land whose patron is the god of war and nobility. Haelyn is a warrior god, as was Anduiras before him, and the Empire was built on conquest more than anything else. I still like the original BR concept that fighters make good landed regents. In my own campaign, I often back the fighter-focused regents with Noble or Expert advisors, chamberlains, etc. to help support them in the court circles. If using Kn: Law as a requisite skill of ruling law holdings, then I&#39;d add that as a class skill for fighters.

[ConjurerDragon]

Kenneth Gauck schrieb:

> I`d make Jaison an Aristocrat 5/Fighter2.

...

> If I used my own Aristocrat, he`d have 16 fewer skill points the same number

> of feats plus the class features Leadership, Wealth, Rank, Title, Education,

> and Noble Conduct.

> Kenneth Gauck



Kenneth when you use Aristocrat and mean your own creation and others

say Aristocrat and mean the "Noble" class or PC-Aristocrat from the BRCS

instead and still others refer to Aristocrat and mean the NPC class from

the PHB then it gets somewhat confusing. Perhaps PHB Aristocrat, BRCS

Noble and "my own" or "homebrew" Aristorat would allow even casual

readers to understand the differences.



A question to the various creators of Jaesons stats:

Does Jaeson desever the PC class BRCS Noble at all? After all he started

only as lieutenant of the former ruler and was not born as ruler or

even member of the ruling family of the duchy. Perhaps he ought to have

only the PHB Aristocrat or at least 1 level in it?

bye

Michael

[kgauck]

----- Original Message -----

From: "Osprey" <brnetboard@BIRTHRIGHT.NET>

Sent: Sunday, October 12, 2003 8:25 AM





> Honestly, I`d keep Raenech`s focus on the Fighter aspect.



The aristocrat is a fighter, as noted by his same feat development (Raenech

could have the same number or one few feats, and could not have Weapon

Specialization), has access to the same weapons and armor. His BAB is only

two less. He may be weaker in a one on one against a pure fighter, but in a

group combat he can certainly hold his own.



> He`s a usurper, originally a lieutenant to the old duke. And as of

> 551 MR, it doesn`t seem like he`s been duke for all that long [...]

> I figure he might have been minor nobility in Osoerde. But he has

> very militant attitudes in his style of rulership.



What did Jaison do as a lieutenant? As a pure fighter he`s unfit to solve

the problems described in the random events section. As a pure fighter he

has no skills other than fighting. This is what I like about the fighter

class - it put 100% of its build into fighting. Not fighting and law, not

fighting and social skills, not fighting and governance. Its pure combat.

Which means, I can mix it in to a character design as much as is desired.

But I never build pure fighters except as low ranking muscle. If Jaison was

a bodyguard for the old duke, OK, maybe he`s pure fighter. But if he was

minor nobility and a lieutenant, he`s mostly aristocrat. Even if he came up

through the military he`s still aristocrat, not fighter, because he spend

his time directing others, not slogging it out himself. When the slogging

time comes, he can stand up with his fellows, but its not a pure combat

machine. Such a class is a helpless babe in a political game. His charm

comes from the fact that you can mix it in to create a pure combat

admixture.



> Anuire may be heavily political, but it`s also a land whose patron is the

god of war and nobility. Haelyn is a warrior god, as was Anduiras before

him,



Haelyn is the pure aristocratic god. Cuireacen may be a true fighter

patron, but Haelyn is all aristocrat. He admixes his combat with law,

wisdom, a code of behavior, a social responsibility, a hierarchical notion

of society. If Haelyn were a fighter god, what would an aristocratic patron

look like?



> and the Empire was built on conquest more than anything else.



So was the Roman empire, but its held together by law. The proper Anuirean

ruler is likewise capable of conquest and of governance, and that requires

the Aristocratic division of fighting capabality and governing skills. Not

pure conquest. That would be the mongols, who leave and just demand a

tribute.



> I still like the original BR concept that fighters make good landed

regents.



Fighters aren`t good at anything but fighting.



> In my own campaign, I often back the fighter-focused regents with

> Noble or Expert advisors, chamberlains, etc. to help support them

> in the court circles. If using Kn: Law as a requisite skill of ruling law

> holdings, then I`d add that as a class skill for fighters.



Play a campaign where the PC`s play the advisors and the ruler is an NPC of

pure fighter build. Watch the PC`s play puppetmaster to the helpless ruler.

Fighters should not have any skills other than the run-jump-climb variety,

because otherwise you are mixing in non-combat skills. The fighter is pure

combat, not combat plus. Combat plus is the aristocrat.



Kenneth Gauck

kgauck@mchsi.com

[Eosin the Red]

> Osprey wrote:

> Honestly, I`d keep Raenech`s focus on the Fighter aspect. He`s a usurper, originally a lieutenant to the old duke. And as of 551 MR, it doesn`t seem like he`s been duke for all that long, otherwise the situation with Moergen would probably be resolved.



I agree with keeping the fighter focus...My difficulty is in his skill allocation (which is why I mentioned that I have him different for skill reasons alone). I don`t think the straight fighter version is any better at "fighting" than the fighter/rogue and the skills chosen for the rogue aspect were specifically geared to make those levels more fighter-ish.



I would not go with a Fighter/Noble for Raenech. I don`t recall him being noble and it does not fit the way "I see him" - but might fit for you. The main difficulty (for me) with straight fighter versions like the one you submitted, and this is personal preference, is that he knows no more about the laws of nobility than your average tenent farmer, he has no skill at subtrefuge - which is not in keeping with his ability to fool the previous regent into believing that he is other than a bastard nor any skill at deflecting the surrounding regents. The straight fighter version can only kill....and not with any sort of finesse. His skill allocation looks more like the dumb fighter in the party than a canny leader who has managed to hold on to a realm for 5 years. There is not any thing wrong with the build - I just don`t see it representing a man who stole a duchy through subtrefuge and has kept it.



The second matter that bugs me on the skill allocation for characters like this is that it sets an example for other players. That example is that "Nothing but combat skills matter and spend every single skill point in these 4 skills" This makes Raenech a better general than every single regent who is less than 7th level and better than those who are 7th level but decide that they might need to know a little about nobility (KS:Nobility) or the realm they govern (KS: Local).



Characters should be built with a goal of making them strong at what they do and balanced against each other - but not at the expence of spending every single skill point on one narrow focus. Even Gavin Tael and Boeruine have skill points spent outside of this narrow focus but if they are not able to MAX those skills out, the fighter only version of Raenech is better than they are -- when they are famed for it throughout Anuire.



I agree that Avan is probably better than 50% Noble - but disagree with Boeruine being straight fighter...He should have a level in Noble (Or another skill generating class at first level) to reflect that he was taught things and had the best education that money could buy. Aeric Boeriune without KS History - or KS Nobility at a reasonable level (5 Ranks) is pretty hollow. It is part of his make up and destiny to right the wrongs and understand various heraldric claims to titles.



Regents need a somewhat more diverse set of skills than a door kick`n brawler and multiclassing quickly and easily provides that (You can take - Expert, Noble, or Rogue). It may be that we just come at the game a little differently and you do not see skills as defineing a charcter as much as feats and stats but to me (especially in BR) skills are as much, if not more of a measure of a character as feats and stats. The skills also need to balance out across the whole spectrum - The Mhor should be the undeniably best general on the field, followed by Boeruine, and then Tael. After the top three it gets cloudy but IMO Raenech is not in that top echelon of Generals. That spot is reserved for Bradonnel, the Commander of Avanil`s military (Darien or another), then the Heads of the MOC and HA, and the head of the Imperial Guard.



The way the fighter Raenech is built that makes it nearly impossible for this structure - inferred from RoE - to work.



Even with careful building of all the prime characters it is still impossible to reflect comparitive skill levels since Boeriune is 5 levels higher than the Mhor he will be far and away the better general - they are not even in the same league, even Gavin Tael will dominate the Mhor on the field of battle, not just in terms of numbers but in terms of skill and ability.



The builds for 3.5 and 3.0 need to reflect a comparitive skill level while holding to what we know....That will be dang hard to do with out careful thought about where regents spend their points....I know that Daeric Mhoried is a better general than Raenech but it is impossible to reflect that if we accept that Raenech has the skills as allocated in the fighter build.



Anyway, kinda rambled off course a little bit. :)



Randy~Eosin

[Eosin the Red]

Kenneth Wrote:

> What did Jaison do as a lieutenant? As a pure fighter he`s unfit to solve the problems described in the random events section. As a pure fighter he has no skills other than fighting. This is what I like about the fighter class - it put 100% of its build into fighting. Not fighting and law, not fighting and social skills, not fighting and governance. Its pure combat. Which means, I can mix it in to a character design as much as is desired. But I never build pure fighters except as low ranking muscle. If Jaison was a bodyguard for the old duke, OK, maybe he`s pure fighter. But if he was minor nobility and a lieutenant, he`s mostly aristocrat. Even if he came up through the military he`s still aristocrat, not fighter, because he spend his time directing others, not slogging it out himself. When the slogging time comes, he can stand up with his fellows, but its not a pure combat machine. Such a class is a helpless babe in a political game. His charm comes from the fact that you can mix it in to create a pure combat admixture.



Exactly...The skills section of the JR Fighter build is what tweeks me.



I think we cross posted :)



This is also one of those cases where we all use different stuff....I like Kenneth`s aristocrat but I use the Wheel of Time/Star Wars revised Noble as the aristocracy. I also tend to look less at what the heading of the class says and more to what it gives me in the terms of building blocks that I can use. I built a fighter/rogue but that build was anything but roguish...It was an athletic, somewhat canny, fighter, not the pre-emminent general in Anuire but no slouch either.



> Fighters aren`t good at anything but fighting.



Amen, brother!!





Randy ~ Eosin

[Eosin the Red]

> Administration 10, Appraise 5, Bluff 9, Diplomacy 5, Intimidate 9, Knowledge (Law) 5, Knowledge (Nobility) 5, Ride 7, Sense Motive 7





I don`t use law but could buy this allocation of skills. I forgot admin on my write up (doing it from memory) but I think I placed it considerably lower (like 2-3 ranks).



Randy

[Raesene Andu]

The new version of the noble for the BRCS 3.5 is a much improved class IMO. It has dropped the bonus feats in favour of new abilities unique to the noble and the skill list has warcraft include. If you are playing a regent, a few levels of noble makes your regent a lot more capable.

To take a look at the new noble class, go here http://users.chariot.net.au/~hoss/pbem/newnoble.pdf

Note: This is only a proposed version, it hasn&#39;t been adopted for the revised BRCS yet.

[Eosin the Red]

> Raesene Andu wrote:

> The new version of the noble for the BRCS 3.5 is a much improved class

IMO. It has dropped the bonus feats in favour of new abilities unique to the

noble and the skill list has warcraft include. If you are playing a regent,

a few levels of noble makes your regent a lot more capable.





That is a darn fine noble...I like the +20 BAB but without the bucket`o

feats of the fighter. Darn fine job, IMO. I made a joke that the previous

noble - which is a good class but not really a noble - was a of a jack of

all trades type class.



Randy~Eosin

[kgauck]

----- Original Message -----

From: "Michael Romes" <Archmage@T-ONLINE.DE>

Sent: Sunday, October 12, 2003 9:50 AM





> it gets somewhat confusing



I don`t think there are serious differences between the BRCS Noble,

Raesene`s new noble, the noble from Mongoose, the versions of the class in

Wheel of Time, Soverigen Stone, or a host of other settings that are meant

to reflect more than the familiar four class party exploring dungeons. All

use basically the same assumptions, and then very them on that theme. The

point here is not to pick one, its to work with the idea of the class that

combines combat and leadership, regardless of the subtle variations

different designers have used.



> A question to the various creators of Jaesons stats:

> Does Jaeson desever the PC class BRCS Noble at all? After all he started

> only as lieutenant of the former ruler and was not born as ruler or

> even member of the ruling family of the duchy. Perhaps he ought to have

> only the PHB Aristocrat or at least 1 level in it?



The ducal family is not the only noble family in Osoerde. Were the

Wittlesbach`s the only noble family in Bavaria? Osoerde has around 54,000

people in the BRCS demographic calculator. Given the near universal human

experience, looking at many cultures and time periods, roughly 2% of the

population can be expected to be either noble or something aproximating the

special elite characteristics of a noble. That gives us a number of just

over 1000 noble individuals in Osoerde. This thousand souls is very likely

the recruiting pool for rulers to find their lieutenants, assistants,

courtiers, officers, and officials. Those drawn from outside the class of

well born guilders, estate owners, and privlidged clergy are very likely to

be the exceptionally talented Experts. As far as I am concerned, everyone

in BR has at least a level of some kind of Aristocrat (and it really doesn`t

matter which one) with the exception of a few lucky experts who get to live

in court circles. Very likely the children of those experts will have a

very good chance to either be raised as aristocrats or something very close

indeed.



To imagine a court based BR game (I am not talking about just using the

setting to run strait D&D) in which everyone is not an aristocrat is like

imagining a pirate game in which characters are built that know nothing

about ships or life at sea, or a gladiator campaign where a level of fighter

is not a default expectation.



Kenneth Gauck

kgauck@mchsi.com

[Raesene Andu]

Actually in the Atlas of Cerilia, Osoerde will be listed with a population of 156,000 (based on the average of the population level) and the largest realm in Anuire is Ghoere with 434,000 people, and the total population of Anuire is just over 6 million (including non-human realms).

By the way, that isn&#39;t my version of the noble, Travis Doom wrote it for the BRCS revision, I&#39;m just posting it now mainly because I&#39;m using it in my pbem game, and so you can all discuss it before it is finalised.

[kgauck]

----- Original Message -----

From: "Raesene Andu" <brnetboard@BIRTHRIGHT.NET>

Sent: Monday, October 13, 2003 2:25 AM





> Actually in the Atlas of Cerilia, Osoerde will be listed with a

> population of 156,000 (based on the average of the population level)



I don`t use the 2e published figure for population either, but I thought it

best to take the official numbers because they were the lowest, and so even

in the most depopulated Cerilia, the number of nobles is higher than a

single family. In the Atlas, a rough figure of 3000 nobles would grace

Osoerde, even a larger pool for the selection of lieutenants.



> By the way, that isn`t my version of the noble, Travis Doom wrote it

> for the BRCS revision, I`m just posting it now mainly because I`m using

> it in my pbem game, and so you can all discuss it before it is finalised.



I am pleased to grant attribution where it is due.



Kenneth Gauck

kgauck@mchsi.com

[kgauck]

----- Original Message -----

From: "Eosin the Red" <eosin_the_red@COX.NET>

Sent: Sunday, October 12, 2003 5:17 PM





> I built a fighter/rogue but that build was anything but roguish.



Rogue is a versatile class. I find it very good for reflecting aristocrats

who are a bit more on the roguish side, who might do more evesdropping,

forgery, and slipping a toxic elixer into the dukes cup than the run of the

mill aristocrat. Such rascals who are strait Aristocrats generally can be

good at one kind of rascally thing, Rogues can be good at several. The nice

overlap of Aristocrat and Rogue skill lists makes it hard to tell which is

which if the Rogue can avoid certain situations. A Fighter-Rogue

construction avoids that problem.



> This is also one of those cases where we all use different stuff



I rarely use the Fighter-Rogue because most of it is already present in the

Aristocrat. The only time I would specifically go Fighter-Rogue was if I

wanted the special class features of the Rogue. But, the fact that it does

produce a similar product as the Aristocrat makes it just as sensible an

approach by a different route. Could Jaison have a few sneak attacks up his

sleeve? It wouldn`t suprise me.



Kenneth Gauck

kgauck@mchsi.com

[Ariadne]

Originally posted by Eosin the Red@Oct 12 2003, 12:45 AM
Jaison Raenech, Male Human Ftr4/Rog3: HD 4d10 + 4 plus 3d6 + 3; hp 42; Init +6 (+2 dex, +4 Improved Inish); Move 30; AC 17 (+1 Chainshirt, + 2 Dex), touch 12, flat 15; BAB +6; Grap +8; Atk +13/+8 melee (1d8 + 8 Grandmark, long sword) SA evasion, sneak attack +2d6; AL LE; SV Fort +6, Ref +6, Will +3; Str 16, Dex 14, Con 13, Int 14, Wis 11, Cha 12, Bld 18

Isn&#39;t it better to make Jaison Rog3/ Fighter4? Just for min-maxing ;)

My personal opinion is to make him Fighter 7 only or Fighter/ Prestige class (even Assassin would fit)...

Maybe something like Fighter 6/ Assassin 1 or Fighter 5/ Assassin 2...

Just an idea.

[DanMcSorley]

On Mon, 13 Oct 2003, Ariadne wrote:

> Isn`t it better to make Jaison Rog3/ Fighter4? Just for min-maxing ;)



No. That`s never a good reason. If you`re designing anything based on

min-maxing concerns, quit it.



--

Daniel McSorley

[Green Knight]

Oh no, if you don`t min-max, the antagonists won`t fit into the CR system, and we`ll have a world of hurt :-)

>

> Fra: Daniel McSorley <mcsorley@OKKOD.PAIR.COM>

> Dato: 2003/10/13 Mon PM 05:27:00 CEST

> Til: BIRTHRIGHT-L@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM

> Emne: Re: Atlas Project 2: Npc Stats [2#1952]

>

> On Mon, 13 Oct 2003, Ariadne wrote:

> > Isn`t it better to make Jaison Rog3/ Fighter4? Just for min-maxing ;)

>

> No. That`s never a good reason. If you`re designing anything based on

> min-maxing concerns, quit it.

>

> --

> Daniel McSorley

>

>

>

>

>

>

>



Cheers

Bjørn



-------------------------------------------------

WebMail fra Tele2 http://www.tele2.no

-------------------------------------------------

[DanMcSorley]

On Mon, 13 Oct 2003, Green Knight wrote:

> Oh no, if you don`t min-max, the antagonists won`t fit into the CR

> system, and we`ll have a world of hurt :-)



Heh, if anyone is going through the Atlas like it`s a laundry list, they

deserve any problems they get. "I have defeated Alamie, Avanil, and

Boeruine, next alphabetically is Brosengae! Mount up!"



--

Daniel McSorley

[Sir Justine]

> Isn`t it better to make Jaison Rog3/ Fighter4? Just for min-maxing ;)

No. That`s never a good reason. If you`re designing anything based on
min-maxing concerns, quit it.


Hmm... not necessarily; I mean, I too don&#39;t think "min-maxing" is a good way to design characters (be they PCs or NPCs) - what I think is that the rules must represent what the character is in the game world.

For example, if I&#39;m going to build "Sir Lancelot" I have to ensure that, by the rules, he is "invincible" in combat, because in the history he was&#33; If by the rules every fighter 10 manages to beat him, my build is wrong (unless he is Bernard Cornwell&#39;s Lancelot... :lol: ), as it would be wrong if he didn&#39;t have the proper skills and abilities.

Just what I&#39;m saying is that sometimes a character has to be "strong" in the rules for his roleplay to be correct.

[Ariadne]

Originally posted by DanMcSorley@Oct 13 2003, 05:20 PM
On Mon, 13 Oct 2003, Green Knight wrote:

> Oh no, if you don`t min-max, the antagonists won`t fit into the CR

> system, and we`ll have a world of hurt :-)



Heh, if anyone is going through the Atlas like it`s a laundry list, they

deserve any problems they get. "I have defeated Alamie, Avanil, and

Boeruine, next alphabetically is Brosengae&#33; Mount up&#33;"



--

Daniel McSorley













Well, I don&#39;t min-max the realms I describe, I use the 2nd ED stats. So don&#39;t worry...