Birthright Classes and Regency Points

[JakobLiar]

I have been trying to scan the threads and forums, as well as the wiki, for information depicting 3.0/3.5 classes and their distribution of Half and Full regency points for holdings. I haven't found anything just yet and would like to be able to figure it out.

Of course, I am working on classes from the Pathfinder system, but 3.0/3.5 is always a good start that will provide me with most of the classes. I am hopeful that someone can inform me or point me to the right thread.

Thank you.

[AndrewTall]

BRCS doesn't collect regency based on class in itself, it gathers it based on skills.

http://www.birthright.net/forums/showwiki.php?title=BRCS:Chapter_five_Ruling_a_doma in_Domain_collections

Given the distribution of skills in practice the effect is similar at moderate levels, but at low levels it can be quite different.

[JakobLiar]

I've seen it a lot where certain classes gain certain amounts of regency.

Like this:

Cleric: Law (Half), Temple (Full)
Fighter: Law (Full)

etc...

[Thelandrin]

That's the simplest thing to do if you're not using 3rd Ed's skill point system. :)

[JakobLiar]

Main reason I am asking is because I am currently stuck on only two classes: Barbarian and Ranger. Other than those two, I am fine. I plan on making good advantages for each of the classes, but its Barbarian and Ranger I am stuck on since neither are technically Law-based (Barbarians are Chaotic, so they wouldn't focus on creating Law Holdings in my opinion) and Rangers are rather Neutral and would only be Half-Law in my opinion.

[Sorontar]

The following is my opinion and you are welcome to disagree.

Barbarians can conceptually be law-based, just not in the same way as a feudal system. The laws may not be written down and are ad-hoc, based on the will of those casting judgement. Think of it like thugs and gangs, not laws, officers and jails.

Also, people have talked about criminals setting up law holdings using similar structures, but perhaps with more formalities. These would have protection rackets instead of rates for city guards.

As for rangers, their concern is more on the land and the lesser person than protecting man-made assets. They will look after the common law and resources more than wealth. Again, their structure will be informal. Their regency will get them information through word-of-mouth, rather than employees. So a ranger regent with a law holding will be the one making sure common-sense and fairplay occurs. What he considers to be fairplay will depend on his alliegiences and alignment.

So a law holding, can be run in a chaotic or neutral way, whilst still be a law holding.

Sorontar

[JakobLiar]

I do not disagree at all. I had thought maybe a hint of that, but your words definitely confirm my suspicions. I do like it and will work it that way.

Thank you.

[AndrewTall]

A law holding in Vosgaard or a sidhe realm would be unrecognisable to an Anuirean noble or a Karamhul I suspect, but a law holding can also represent a network of sheriffs, verderers and magistrates in Anuire (the traditional view if you like) but could equally be a criminal network of bully-boys running a collection racket and a network of corrupt officials - the system is very flexible, "law" in this case is probably a poor name, I look at what a law holding can do mechanically and many different social organisations could fit into it.