What imho should be changed in Birthright

[Thomas_Percy]

This is five general observations about Birthright rules, which can be rearranged. I’m interesting of yours opinion about this.

1. General idea of heroes-kings is controversial. Regents have no reason for adventuring – they can make the world better from the office. They have too much duty and gold, to leave the castle and go to the dungeon. A regent on the adventure is easy target for asassination. Adventure is a job of lieutenants and minor nobles, such as a baron of the province or a knight.

2. Strategical system for domain (several provinces) rulers is excelent, but there is no system for minor rulers, such as a baron of the province or a knight. It looks like gold and regency of domain regent comes from emptiness. There is no rules to play regent’s vassals.

3. Whole world is too small. Adventures based on travelling are hard to make, because everything is near. Armies are too fast – you can conquer whole continent in a year.

4. Realm Spells are not compatibile with PHB spells. I don’t know, if a regent-wizard cast Mass Destruction, what damage it makes to the single target creature.

5. Strategical system has some bugs, such as possibility to rule province to the level 10 (Constantinpole-like) in 2 years, or muster maximum number of units from the same province again and again and again with no respect for demographics.

[Angelbialaska]

1) I agree on some points. Some rulers have little reason to go adventuring, but many rulers will see an advantage of doing so. It may not be because of the gold and yes, the adventuring business carries a lot of risks, but on the other hand you achieve a better understanding of yourself and your limitations (getting XP and levels) and you get out with the people, allowing them to look at you and see that you're a ruler that has courage to go out among them. This makes you a better leader in the eyes of the people. Also adventures can take many forms, not just going to the nearby dungeon and remove monsters that threatened the population of your domain, but you may go to nearby realms or examine the regents that are in your realm and get information and such that way too, without it costing you any gold and regency. There are plenty of opportunities where you may want to prove that you're better than the others in your realm.

2) Minor vassals, such as those handling day to day affairs in your domain, are just part of the system. They get money to sustain a rather good life, a fortress and a few soldiers. And then the rest of the money that are gotten by the tax, are going to the overall ruler. The minor nobles have no say on domain level, but they have a lot to say in day to day affairs and they're excellent to have events around. Other vassals, such as Brosengae, Taeghas and Mieres to Avanil, pay some money and regency each season and in return Avanil protects them. For instance Brosengae may pay 4-8 Regency and an equal amount of GB, depending of how harsh Avan is. It may be a lot more, which it is in some cases, such as the Chimaeron, where the rulers hardly have enough to pay their tribute to the Chimaera. But such a tribute has the tendency of making loyalty less.

3: Conquering the continent in a year requires more power than the Gorgon possess. You can conquer 12 provinces in a year and that's if you only have war and nothing more than war. Or if you can catch the regent of a realm you invade, you will be able to divest. But it still takes a lot more than a year.

4) Realm spells aren't meant to be compatible to ordinary spells. Realm spells are rituals that takes a month with 8 hours of chanting per day to pull off. You just don't do that to hit a single creature. If a unit is hit with a player character, then I'd be doing damage like a fireball to the character.

5) I agree that the system is flawed here. I've seen many attempts to solve the rule to level 10 province in 1 year problem. The one I like the most is the one where you can only rule the province once per province level turns. So ruling Ilien to level 10 will take 7 + 8 + 9 = 24 turns (6 years) and that's if all rolls succeed and the DC is high and with no RP to boost the roll, then several of the attempts should be failing. So I think it would be more realistic with 12 years for it. And that's provided that there is no random disease events, no spells, no wars, no raids, etc. As for the units hired, then most promises can provide many units easily. If you want to house rule it, then just say that you can hire province level when the province is full of warriors and after that, the province counts as level 0 for purposes of recruitment and the virtual province level increases by 1 per season. So if Rogr hires 7 units (or allows someone to hire 7 units) in Ilien, then it takes him 7 turns before there are units enough in Ilien to pull the same stunt again. Disbanding units in the province restores units so one can hire faster.

[Danip]

1. I agree that players of regents have a harder time rationalizing individual adventures then standard DnD players. This is actually one of the things I like most about Birthright. Birthright regents arnt well suited to a 'back to the dungeon' campaign. Regents tend not to be "adventurers"; as in "I have nothing to lose and a sharp sword, I think I'll throw my life away for some spare change."

Standard boring hooks like "your all sitting in the inn one day," "word of goblins in nearby ruins," or "a strange hooded figure approaches" arnt so useful to DMs in Cerelia. Adventures can be so much better motivated for regents; defense of the kingdom, the great game of politics and such. Of course, this means a bit more effort on the adventuring DM's side. Getting the players into the DMs beloved store bought module adventure can be a struggle. And keeping them from calling in the cavalry to save the day is hard, because they often own some cavalry.

2. I agree with you again. Campaigns with a lively society just below the regent (nobles, notables, constables, etc) are pretty much left up to the DM to figure out. If a character falls a little below regent level in power the player is out of the domain system. With the earlier point you noted this creates a little bit of a delema. Those below regent level have more opportunities and easier motivations for varied adventures, but an undefined role in the domain system. The Robin Hood with bandits in one part of one province, the minor noble with a several village estate, the king's children or cohorts all can fall into this nebulous zone. These situations can be shoe-horned into the domain system, but the system works best for mulitprovince realms.
This is kind of a shame because several of the recommended (and fun) ways to play in Cerelia involved having only one or two of the players in a party be regents. The other players tend to then be bored with domain level actions and might not even bother to learn the domain system.
The Book of Regency is a good read for DMs and players alike in fleshing out situations like this.

3. Cant comment to much on the speed of armies, but I have felt the small size of Cerelia to be a deficit myself. A recent party from Brecthur traveled to Khinasi. Looking on the map it is a short hike overland. Telling them that there are moutains and all sorts of monsters in the way didnt impress upon them the separation of these two regions.
The small size of nations and armies is also less then epic. Especially navies. A party of fifth level doesnt have that much trouble taking out a single ship (a fireball here, web there, darkenss too) even if it has a full military crew. Then check the suitable atlas for that nation.... Oh, you just took out a third of their navy...hmmm.

4. Never though of this. This actually wouldnt be too hard to fix I think. Some sort of description of the effects of battle spells in normal DnD lingo would be possible. What actually happens when you blast a hit off of a unit? And the party in that unit? Anyone have houserules they use for this?

5. Looks like you have been reading the forums. For every way someone has exploited the system some DM has houseruled. But that is what the BRCS playtest is all about.

[Raesene Andu]

Originally posted by Danip@Jan 13 2005, 11:26 AM
4. Never though of this. This actually wouldnt be too hard to fix I think. Some sort of description of the effects of battle spells in normal DnD lingo would be possible. What actually happens when you blast a hit off of a unit? And the party in that unit? Anyone have houserules they use for this?

Interestingly this is one thing that was discussed when designing the BRCS, if information on the effect of the realm spell on individuals shouldn't be included. For example...

Invoked Devastation
Evocation
Level: Arcane 9
Cost: 10 RP/province level
Effect: Up to one province / 3 levels
Duration: Instantaneous
Prerequisites: ?

This surpassingly powerful realm spell ravages the land; the very elements themselves aid the wizard in destroying any sentient life caught within the provinces affected, and casting down most structures.
This spell immediately reduces the province level(s) of the affected province(s) as the wizard sees fit. It similarly reduces the levels of any structures within the provinces; if a structure has no levels, it is 90% likely to be destroyed by the force of this spell.
Components: The material component for this spell is a complete royal outfit, including a scepter and crown, worth at least 5000 gp, all burned at a funeral pyre.
Casting this spell causes tremendous stress on the spellcaster; the spell costs 1000 XP per province level to be affected.
Individual Effect: Any individual caught within the affected province(s) takes 2d6 points of damage, plus 1d6 points of damage per province level affected; a Reflex save is allowed for half damage.


However, as you know, this never made it into the final version. Another idea that was being tossed around was to give realm spells prerequesites, spells the caster needed to know before they can learn the realm spell, but this was dropped, which is a good thing I think.

It wouldn't be too hard to reintroduce information about individual effects of realm spells if you want, anyone want to volunteer to do it?

[A_dark]

you can play minor counts etc by having them collect taxes and rp from the province and send them to the central regent

Situations like this exist in rjurik with the jarls or in Djafra with the 3 regents, or in Aftane with the 3 landed regents and the temple, source, guild, bard regents. Each can control one province and all is happy...

[Green Knight]

Just an idea...

If you really want to play on the a-knight-and-his-manor level, you can rule that the GB/RP provided to the province ruler actually represents about half of what there is, and that the rest goes to the upkeep of various petty lords and so.

Then, if you rule that 1 province level can support 1 minor noble (income/RP divided among them), you're set. You can even have a bit more powerful minor nobles who control 2 or more of these "shadow holdings".

This could be extrapolated to other types of holdings as well. For each temple lvl there could be one minor religious leader, and each guild lvl could be one group of minor guilds. Probably could be used for sources as well, at least in terms of mechanics, but that may not be appropriate given the low number of existing mages.

I'm sure there is a few more things that should be outlined as well. I may find time between map-making and PBeMing to actually make a brief set of rules for it (but not right now).

B

[Green Knight]

Originally posted by Thomas_Percy@Jan 12 2005, 11:36 PM
3. Whole world is too small. Adventures based on travelling are hard to make, because everything is near.
Agreed!

Which is why I increased the size of Cerilia to actually make it the size of Europe...and it could perhaps have been even bigger still if you wanted Cerilia to be a real continent.

Check out the new world maps from the Download section

[Green Knight]

Originally posted by Thomas_Percy@Jan 12 2005, 11:36 PM
4. Realm Spells are not compatibile with PHB spells. I don’t know, if a regent-wizard cast Mass Destruction, what damage it makes to the single target creature.
In my gamer es I've written out the spells with a section called Character Level Effects - which basically tells you how the spell would affect a character in a unit that is say hit by Mass Destruction.

Not all the spells ahve such descriptions, so I've also included a bit about how the judge realm spell effects on the fly.

I'd suggest adding something similar to the rules in the BRCS.

B

[Green Knight]

Originally posted by Thomas_Percy@Jan 12 2005, 11:36 PM
5. Strategical system has some bugs, such as possibility to rule province to the level 10 (Constantinpole-like) in 2 years, or muster maximum number of units from the same province again and again and again with no respect for demographics.
Like the small size of Cerilia, this one always bothered me greatly.

I have my own fix for it; basically a province grows slowly in level over the course of years and decades. Regents can spend Gbs and rule rpovince actions to speed it up, but except for the low leves the cost is so great that they can only hastent the level increase slightly, with no hope of speedy province gains. If not, the province will eventually grown in level by itself.

How it is solved isn't that important, but it MUST be fixed.

B

[Green Knight]

Originally posted by Thomas_Percy@Jan 12 2005, 11:36 PM
Armies are too fast – you can conquer whole continent in a year.
Given the small size of Cerilia I'd rater say that armies are on the slow side...even when you figure friction into the movement values of units/armies, they are pretty slow moving - oooh, my infantry can move 30 miles in one 8 day week!

That aside, an army would move at a speed of 1 province/war move for an infantry army. So that's 48 provinces a year...it can move a distance, but moving and conquering are two different things...

If you feel that conquest is too easy, then I suggest that the movment rate is not the problem, nor the size of Cerilia, but rather something about the warfare system as a whole.

B

[Mark_Aurel]

Re: Your points.

1. Not at all. The regents' resources are pretty limited, for one. They need to take personal action in many cases anyway. You also seem to be projecting a modern mindset of delegation onto an older world with a different mindset.

2. I agree.

3. Not really. You need to keep the restraints of the world in mind as much as anything; making the world contain more land does not necessarily create more of an 'epic feel.' The world is not so small as to feel constrained, yet not too large, either. Keep the perspective of the inhabitants in mind as well. Compared to today's people, the people of Cerilia must be fairly introverted; trade and contact with other continents is minimal. If you think of the world as something you have to walk around in, or ride in, I think you'll see that it's a fairly large world.

I'd be more concerned about population size than geographical size. Compared to France from even before the Roman times, Anuire is very sparsely populated, for instance. If you increase the area without inflating the population, the country becomes a wasteland. Population needs to be increased before area if you want to approximate the 'real world' better.

As for the armies being too fast, well, think of Alexander the Great. He conquered a rather large area in a very brief time as well. The political circumstances were different, but I don't see why Cerilia would be different here. If a ruler gets the ball rolling, he could theoretically conquer a large area very quickly. I'm actually more troubled by how _difficult_ that is, than how _easy_ it is, with the investiture rules as they are. The rules resist large-scale quick gains of territory.

4. I agree.

5. Kings and emperors have, in some periods, had traditions for shifting population masses about. Goes back to the Assyrians and Egyptians, even. But when you consider the pace, and that the population size is non-linear, yes, it is a bit fast. But by domain standards, it's a _huge_ investment, and if a player can afford to make it, something else is broken.

[Raesene Andu]

Originally posted by Mark_Aurel@Jan 13 2005, 10:40 PM
As for the armies being too fast, well, think of Alexander the Great. He conquered a rather large area in a very brief time as well. The political circumstances were different, but I don't see why Cerilia would be different here. If a ruler gets the ball rolling, he could theoretically conquer a large area very quickly. I'm actually more troubled by how _difficult_ that is, than how _easy_ it is, with the investiture rules as they are. The rules resist large-scale quick gains of territory.
I've been thinking about this and I'd say that this is true only if you have to individually conquer and tame each province in turn. If you have to do that, it is going to take time anyway.

The easy way to win a war is to convince the enemy that it isn't worth fighting and force them to the negotiating table. The threat of the annialation of their armies, people, and holdings is usually enough to force an enemy to surrender if he is outnumbered. If not, then you have to do it the hard way.

Wars are only hard to win if the enemy puts up a fight and if that happens they can be long, drawn out affairs and should take a long time for the invader to conquer and invest each province.

[Raesene Andu]

Originally posted by Green Knight@Jan 13 2005, 06:07 PM
In my gamer es I've written out the spells with a section called Character Level Effects - which basically tells you how the spell would affect a character in a unit that is say hit by Mass Destruction.
Can you post this information? Just the Character Level Effects info. It would be most useful to have.

[Mark_Aurel]

Originally posted by Raesene Andu@Jan 13 2005, 02:30 PM
I've been thinking about this and I'd say that this is true only if you have to individually conquer and tame each province in turn. If you have to do that, it is going to take time anyway.

The easy way to win a war is to convince the enemy that it isn't worth fighting and force them to the negotiating table. The threat of the annialation of their armies, people, and holdings is usually enough to force an enemy to surrender if he is outnumbered. If not, then you have to do it the hard way.

Wars are only hard to win if the enemy puts up a fight and if that happens they can be long, drawn out affairs and should take a long time for the invader to conquer and invest each province.
Yep. There's basically two things you can accomplish in a war:

1) Force your enemy to negotiate (preferably on your own terms);

2) Obliterate your enemy or enemy's resources completely.

The latter rarely happens; wars of such totality should be extremely rare.

[geeman]

At 11:36 PM 1/12/2005 +0100, Thomas_Percy wrote:



> This is five general observations about Birthright rules, which can be

> rearranged. I’m interesting of yours opinion about this.



A few folks have chimed in on this, but I thought I`d throw my opinion into

the mix....



>1. General idea of heroes-kings is controversial. Regents have no reason

>for adventuring * they can make the world better from the office. They

>have too much duty and gold, to close the castle and go to the dungeon. A

>regent on the adventure is easy target for asassination. Adventure is a

>job of lieutenants and minor nobles, such as a baron of the province or a

>knight.



This is one of my personal favorite aspects of BR. I`d like to note a

couple of things about how things actually are in BR and, perhaps, one or

two about how they _should_ be. First, though the hero/king thing is a bit

of a leap from standard D&D (or just about any RPG, for that matter) it is

the meat of the setting. In many ways it is what differentiates BR from

all other campaigns/RPGs. With that in mind, I don`t know if delegating

adventuring to LTs or minor nobles is such a good idea. Second, the

nobility in BR are, for the most part, relatively minor. There really are

very few "kings" in the sense that they are administrators and figureheads

who occupy primarily figurative positions. Most BR regents are themselves

just a tick above the lowest ranks of nobility, making them in many cases

the characters still very closely connected to having to personally

interact at the adventure level.



This is one of the more difficult things for people who are used to the

standard D&D adventuring system to incorporate, but adventuring at the

domain level is very doable and IMO much more satisfying than regular D&D

adventuring. For one thing, as you note, the rewards for D&D adventuring

are mostly monetary and/or things to go into their inventory. In BR, the

reward is power and influence, which is really only handled in a DM

fiat/murky "favor" system in D&D. If one adventures out the domain actions

or, at least, role-plays them heavily they wind up being much more

interesting than a dungeon crawl and the end result of play is domain level

holdings and effects for which BR has game mechanical ways to portray. In

the end, that`s the best way to play the setting, and the thing that makes

it IMO the best published setting there is.



>2. Strategical system for domain (several provinces) rulers is excelet,

>but there is no system for minor rulers, such as a baron of the province

>or a knight. It looks like gold and regency of domain regent comes from

>emptiness. There is no rules to play regent’s vassals.



There is definitely a gap between the adventure level and the domain

level. I don`t know if it`s as abstract as all that, though. There are

some rules in the original materials about how many physical buildings and

characters are represented by province and holding levels, for instance,

and once one gets access to those numbers one can (if there`s some need) do

the math to determine where the gold comes from, how the regency is

determined, etc. At that point, the function of vassals (small "v" in

order to differentiate these characters from "Vassals" who are themselves

regents who have a vassalage agreement with another regent) is comprehensible.



Though it never expresses this kind of thing outright in any of the BR

materials that I`ve ever seen the best way to portray the activities of

non-regents/LTs at the domain level is by making them equivalent to a

random event. Most random events are negative, but a few have positive

effects, and one can then use that system to portray the effects of

characters who are bridging the gap between the adventure level and the

domain level.



>3. Whole world is too small. Adventures based on travelling are hard to

>make, because everything is near. Armies are too fast * you can conquer

>whole continent in a year.



Couldn`t agree with you more on that one. It`s a bit difficult to simply

go with more real estate for provinces, however, for one main

reason. Cerilia is really already very sparsely populated if one uses the

numbers most often associated with province population levels. Assuming

those numbers are meant to portray actual, individual civilians there is

somewhere in the neighborhood of 1/4 to 1/10th the population in Cerilia as

is reasonable for a late medieval culture, depending on who you ask and

what kind of numbers they see as accurately depicting the population

density of such a culture. (The range of Cerilian cultures is really

between that of an early medieval culture like goblins to what a sort of

early Renaissance level culture among the Brecht with a few weird, magical

cultures like that of elves and dwarves thrown in, making any assessment of

the development of Cerilia on the whole somewhat shaky, but "late medieval"

works as a good general estimate.) If one increases the size of provinces

the numbers represented by population levels get even further thrown out of

whack with the assessments of realistic population density.



If one resizes the provinces then it starts making sense to re-evaluate the

province population levels, which in turn makes it logical to revise the

way holding levels work, not to mention the size of military units, and

those things mean a shift in the value of the GB is necessary or the

revenue tables need to be drastically altered... the list goes on. All of

a sudden the whole system pretty nearly needs to be revisited. I don`t

personally have a problem with revisiting everything, but it is more than

most folks want to take on.



>4. Realm Spells are not compatibile with PHB spells. I don’t know, if a

>regent-wizard cast Mass Destruction, what damage it makes to the single

>target creature.



With a couple of odd little exceptions, of one takes a look at the caster

level of all the original realm spells they are set according to when the

caster gets access to a particular spell. A long time ago I associated all

realm spells with an individual D&D spell, and defined realm spells as the

casting of that spell over and over again over the period of a month using

the power of a holding to store the effects until they are finally released

over a province wide area at the end of the month using RP to disperse the

effects outside the range of a standard, D&D level spell. It works pretty

well as an interpretation, and allows one to see specifically what is going

on when in the transition between the domain/realm spell level and the

adventure level. In my experience, one is best off assuming that the

effects of a realm spell represent a single casting of the adventure level

spell upon individuals.



>5. Strategical system has some bugs, such as possibility to rule province

>to the level 10 (Constantinpole-like) in 2 years, or muster maximum number

>of units from the same province again and again and again with no respect

>for demographics.



This is one of those things that the long-time BR fans have been banging

their heads up against for a very long time.... :) It makes us all a

little insane, I think. In short, there`s yet to be presented a very

adequate way of addressing how regents can suddenly "create" a massive

population.



Personally, I`ve been thinking of splitting province population level from

the domain system and making population a more static figure--not unlike

the source potential of a province--for a long time now, but haven`t really

had to cross that bridge yet. That way population would be more easily set.



Gary

[The incredible, edible Phil]

To address the first point, I would defer to the age old adage: If you want something done right, you have to do it yourself. Also to consider is tha tmost hooks fromt he Player's secrets books often derive from situations where your agents were not able to handle the situation and it has reached your ears. This is also reflecgted in the resolution for random events where modifiers are placed if the regent is involved, an lt, or if you do nothing, etc.

[Thomas_Percy]

About size of Cerilia:

Armies are too fast – you can conquer whole continent in a year.
Clarification first. Sorry, I meant armies are too fast in respect of the size of the land, not simply too fast. I meant, you can OCCUPY whole continent in a year. Sorry once again.

If a ruler gets the ball rolling, he could theoretically conquer a large area very quickly. I'm actually more troubled by how _difficult_ that is, than how _easy_ it is, with the investiture rules as they are. The rules resist large-scale quick gains of territory.
Oh yes, the land is easy to occupy, hard to maintain.

If you feel that conquest is too easy, then I suggest that the movment rate is not the problem, nor the size of Cerilia, but rather something about the warfare system as a whole.
Maybe. Maybe warfare strategy is too abstractional. Maybe maps can be more precise (bigger scale) to show minor terrain obstacles: streams, hills? But imho war move system is easy and good.

If you increase the area without inflating the population, the country becomes a wasteland.
You'ra absolutely right. It can be done in a new eddition as a complex, or at all.


About compatibility of realm spell and 3,5 magic.

Realm spells aren't meant to be compatible to ordinary spells. Realm spells are rituals that takes a month with 8 hours of chanting per day to pull off. You just don't do that to hit a single creature. If a unit is hit with a player character, then I'd be doing damage like a fireball to the character.
And what if Mass Destruction spell hits fire resistant unit?
DM improvisation is good for DM, not for rule makers.
I think it should be done precisely and with full 3,5 magic compatibility in new edition.


About regents as adventurers:

You also seem to be projecting a modern mindset of delegation onto an older world with a different mindset.
The regents have a lot of duties even if they have medieval mindset.The management of vassals, a post, a diplomacy, a intelligence, a propaganda, court of justice, tax collection, a mint, the mines, safety for caravans and ships, building of roads, bridges, ports, lighthouses, cartography, an army, fleet, castles, cannons, reconeissance, warriors' training, horses' handling, aprovisation for an army and ADVENTURES.


Adventures can be so much better motivated for regents; defense of the kingdom, the great game of politics and such.

For one thing, as you note, the rewards for D&D adventuring are mostly monetary and/or things to go into their inventory.* In BR, the reward is power and influence, which is really only handled in a DM

Also to consider is tha tmost hooks fromt he Player's secrets books often derive from situations where your agents were not able to handle the situation and it has reached your ears.
It seems the positives exceed negatives. Imho Birthright is a setting, where is possible to DM-ing PC-patriots.
Thakns for an advice. It is possible to create logical adventures for regents, it's only question of hooks and construction.

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

& my six General Comment on Brt CS:
Description of realms are written for regents. It's hard to "feel the world" as a common adventurer. For example: I'm a 15 level unblooded, not interested in politics ranger and i want to kill The Spider. And what? Too little details to shake my imagination. It is a point where Brt is imho worst of Forgotten Realms, but it can be expanded in a new edition.

[The incredible, edible Phil]

Intelligence and Propaganda are very modern concepts that may or may not apply to an extent in a medieval mindset. The peasants toil and the nobles want it that way. They can care less if they are happy or sad as long as they are content enough not to revolt. When the people turned disgruntled they would go tot he Church and the pastor/priest/etc would remind them that in the Kingdom of God, the first shall become the last, and the last shall become the first and appeal to their beliefs so they continue to toil for the profit of another as they eke out a meager existence.

[Thomas_Percy]

Originally posted by The incredible@ edible Phil,Jan 18 2005, 03:46 AM
Intelligence and Propaganda are very modern concepts that may or may not apply to an extent in a medieval mindset.
We have Agitate and Espionage domain actions, so we must have some men to do it. The church can agitate, but a landlord can agitate even if she is enemy of the church.

Propaganda in a magical world can be more spectacular and successfull than in the TV age, for example: multiple Scryings and big as a stadium illusion "3d "screen for a transmision of the battle LIVE. The ruler can even sell tickets for such a show.