View Full Version : Holding Regency - Any Reason for Class Restriction?

12-31-2014, 11:07 PM
Hi all

After a long time away from D&D, D&D 5e has bought me back and I am looking at running a Birthright game (as BR was always my favorite setting). This question isn't really 5e specific but given it is for a potential 5e game, I thought I would post it here.

In the BR 2e rules, certain classes get Regency from certain holdings. In considering those classes which didn't exist previously however, it occurred to me to wonder whether it is in fact necessary, particularly with how easy multi-classing is in D&D 5e?

Is there any reason why you can't let any class gain Regency from any holding? There is an effective limit to controlling too many holdings being the maintenance cost so at some point you need to do a cost benefit analysis on whether it is worth, say, a Fighter Regent, controlling Sources or Temples.

Sure those holdings bring in Regency, and Temples bring in cash, but the Fighter can't use them to cast Realm Spells (unless they have Ritual Casting? In which case, they are limited to spells of 1/2 their level - in BR terms, they have a caster level of 1/2 their character level) or have multi-classed into Wizard/Priest) but they add up in maintenance costs (EDIT: Also, they are still limited in how much Regency they can accumulate by bloodline strength).

Will it break anything if I let this occur?

01-01-2015, 11:43 AM
Well, it's not really in keeping with the general setting to allow universal access to regency, but if you're concerned about limiting RP to class choices, how about trying skill proficiencies? They're limited, but not impossibly so, and present significant opportunity costs for attempting to sew up all holding RP in one character.

For instance:
Temples might require Religion proficiency and 1st-level divine spells
Sources might need Arcana or Nature and 1st-level arcane spells (plus the ability to use True Magic)
Laws could require History (for law & politics) and Warcraft (Int-based; military activities)
Guilds might be Thieves' Cant or a artisan's tool proficiency, plus either Deception or Persuasion

01-01-2015, 03:16 PM
The BRCS moved away in part from the class=regency approach by moving it towards a skill collection method, although the skills were somewhat "rigged" in favour of the "expected class".

Personally I'm leaning towards a "regent class", it wouldn't provide any table-top benefits, but would solely relate to domain level play.

As levels progressed the regent would get more regency, gold, action bonuses, and perhaps even ation numbers and options, based on what choices they made - effectively a skill-points and feats approach to a class.

The downside would be tracking the classes separately, but in the context of the amount of book-keeping in BR it wouldn't be substantial, and at PBeM level you could likely drop the table-top[ class stuff completely beyond flavour.

01-02-2015, 03:15 AM
Thanks for those responses.

I did consider the setting implications and initially I wasn't going to change things. But upon further consideration, and given how easy multi-classing is (or picking up limited spell casting via Ritual Magic) and the RP limiting nature of bloodlines, it didn't seem worthwhile. Furthermore I note that even in the original rules, classes could have Holdings that they couldn't gain Regency from and I can't really see any reason why a Thief was any better a guild-master (of a legal guild) than a Fighter or Wizard (for example).

Having said that, I have limited the ability to cast realm spells - you must be able to cast ritual spells with either Intelligence (Wizard) or Wisdom (Priest) and have access to the relevant holding. Out of the gate that limits Realm Spells to Wizards, Clerics and Druids.

However, tying Regency collection to having appropriate skills could work nicely. Reflecting on that however, it doesn't appear to be as easy to pick up skills as it was in 3rd (i.e. no skill points per level; I never played 4th beyond a short FR game, so no idea how easy it was then), which means you really need to do make sure you have the skill at first level, even if not starting play as a regent.

Currently the conversion I have sent out to my players just as everyone able to collect regency for any holding, but I will look at skills again. Thanks!

EDIT: I have actually drafted up a skill based version and run it past a couple of my players. We are pretty happy with it. Thanks for the input!

01-02-2015, 11:08 PM
Do feel free to post your system. I threw the above together on reading your post, so I'd like to see what you've come up with. The more the merrier, after all. :)

01-06-2015, 11:17 PM
Do feel free to post your system. I threw the above together on reading your post, so I'd like to see what you've come up with. The more the merrier, after all. :)

Sorry for the delay in responding; I need to check my settings as I wasn't emailed when there was a response :).

I have attached a copy of the conversion doc we intend to use. Hopefully you find it of some use. A couple of things:

1. Our group isn't overly concerned with balance; given that I have tried to stay true to the spirit of the rules, rather than any sort of mechanical balance. Given that, some blood abilities (in particular) may be completely unbalanced.

2. This conversion has borrowed from other conversions linked to from this site and I haven't included credits in the doc (as it was going to be for our home game). I would like to give due credit if this is going to go further, but can't remember who posted what. If you find something in it that you suggested/converted and which I have then used, thank for your assistance and please let me know so I can attribute it.

Also, it has some house rules (which I have left in) around unblooded regents, mainly as something might happen in the future of the campaign which might see it being necessary to have rules for such.

01-07-2015, 12:28 AM
Thanks for that. Why not upload it to the downloads section of BR.net as well? :)

01-07-2015, 01:16 AM
Done :)

01-07-2015, 01:27 AM
Thanks for that. I'll update the 5e BR wiki page later.

01-10-2015, 12:17 AM
The main reason, as far as I can see, for keeping the class specific regency collection is to make somebody want Law holdings. Without them everybody will fight over the Guild & temple holdings because they generate the most cash. Even with the class restrictions it is hard to keep the province ruler from grabbing all the Guild holdings just for their income.

01-13-2015, 05:51 PM
Multi classing is optional. Just don't allow it and the problem goes away. Multi-classing is very 3e/4e(sort of..)/5e, but not very Birthrighty.

I was envisioning Eldritch Knight as an elf/half only class, and perhaps let that subclass get 1/2 from sources or even full rp.

You can do something similar for arcane trickster as representing the magic-user/thief combo of days long ago.