View Full Version : Can mebhaighl be restored?

02-15-2002, 11:06 PM
Though it seams strange I have neigther seen rules saying that it cannot, nor ones that say how to do it. So the question is: can something like that been achived and how? E.G. If High Mage Aelies wants to increase his source rating in a province(e.g. in Fairfield), can he contest the province's civilisation rate and then raise his source holdings(and as a result the province's mebhaighl)? And how?

Lord Valkyr
02-16-2002, 02:22 AM
Yes Mebhaighl can be restored.
see pg 81 of the rulebook the example there is as follows:

......If High mage Aelies wished to increase the level of his source he would first need to contest the province's level.

Hope this answers your question

02-16-2002, 09:12 AM
Ok. But how can one contest the level of a province? Which rules do you use?

02-16-2002, 12:21 PM
You use the rules from the Contest action -- compare the level of active regent's holding to the level of the province. Add the difference to the Success Number (10) if the province's level is higher than the active holding's, and subtract the difference if the active holding's level is higher. Each regent then spends RP to adjust the Success Number, and then the active regent rolls 1d20; if he rolls the Success Number or higher the Province's Level drops by one. Any type of holding can do this, but the problem a source-regent faces is *keeping* the province's level from going up before the magic potential of the province increases (which will take several domain turns if the fluff from Book of Magecraft is used, which I do not).

Green Knight
02-16-2002, 07:57 PM
In addition to contesting, you could just pillage or raze the province with magic (death plague, anyone) or troops. If its your own province, raise the levy then send them to die elsewhere, effectively reducing the province level (lame rule, but...).

Once the province level has dropped, you'll need to wait until the next spring for the land's magic potential to increase by 1. Then you can rule source. Not a bad rule I think ;)

02-17-2002, 12:15 AM
Well, *technically*, unless you reduce its level to 0, it takes 5 whole years (20 domain turns) for the magical potential to increase. I never cared for either new rule, and declined to add both to my campaign when BoM came out.

02-17-2002, 02:51 PM
You guys of the regeneration of mebhaighl as if its nearly instantaneous. The magical essence flows from the nature of the land, from trees, rivers, etc. Have you seen the devastation of a forest fire? Or the amount of destruction deforestation actually causes? A forest that has taken centuries to develop can be destroyed easily, but you do not regrow the great trees that were once there so easily. Why do you think elves feel such pain and hatred fro the destructive ways of humans? One cannot destroy years of life and expect it to return in a matter of months to the same strength.

While its not very useful to players the time it takes for the mebhaighl to return is not too unrealistic. In my experience most campaigns rarely last longer than 3-5 years (sad, but true). Thus the 20 year period for regrowth is a bit of a problem. Perhaps your wizard should seek the aid of druids or elves in rebuilding the land with greater speed. That or focus more on preventing the loss in the first place.

02-18-2002, 02:52 AM
It *was* instantaneous. There was a pretty sybstantial lag between the time the boxed set came out and the time the BoM came out, and the BR Rulebook made no mention of it taking any amount of time to effect the change of magical potential in a province. The difference between instantaneous and 60 action rounds was too radical for me to adopt, so I didn't (and still haven't).

Green Knight
02-18-2002, 10:48 AM
It is 1 year if all traces of civilizationis removed, 5 years if any is left.

Those who use this system: how do you interpret the "all traces of civilization removed"? On a province basis (province must be reduced to 0 AND an effort be made to raze buildings etc.) or on a province level basis (as long as a province level is completely razed)?

Lord Eldred
02-18-2002, 08:16 PM
It seems to me that purposely lower the province level, ie getting rid of population on purpose, is inherently evil!

02-19-2002, 02:19 AM
Orginally posted by Lord Eldred
It seems to me that purposely lower the province level, ie getting rid of population on purpose, is inherently evil!

Murdering the population isn't the only way to drive them out. Fear is a very powerful devise...(it leads to the Dark Side, but it is powerful none-the-less)

Lord Eldred
02-19-2002, 08:42 PM
Using fear to mass relocate people is still evil in my book.

Green Knight
02-19-2002, 09:34 PM
I would be hard pressed to call it a good act...

02-20-2002, 07:06 PM
It depends.
An elven king hunting the goblin or human population away from a domain he controls, is definetly not evil(it is natural :P ). Though a human wizard driving out HUMAN population in order to increase his source holdings is not only evil, it is awful evil (even if he does not murder them). But again if the wizard was Aelies and he was driving out (by scarring them) the intruders of the Erebannier forest, it doesn't seem evil at all. Obviously it is case depended. What for a character seems evil, for another may be the way he should play in order to keep his good alignement.

Green Knight
02-20-2002, 08:28 PM
I don't agree. Evil is evil, even if you don't recognize it yourself. That elves somehow justify the slaughter of humans doesn't make it any less evil.

Lord Eldred
02-24-2002, 05:47 PM
Yes and no Green Knight. Aelies is not justified in driving the people out of the Erbenien in order ot protect the land from being destroyed? Is killing ever not an evil act? If you answer no, then don't ever start a war. If you answer yes, then it is possible that relocating people may not be inherentingly evil. I think I would have to agree with the fine argumentation of centAUr.

02-24-2002, 08:29 PM
So is the use of fear tactics to remove the population (that do not result in the loss of life) evil?

What if a wizard blatantly warns, rewarns and warns trespassers yet again to leave. Signs are posted, warnings are given, and there is absolutely no doubt what so ever that people are invading the wizards legitimate property. Does the wizard have the right to attack or remove teh squatters by force, possibly even death?

While it sounds absurd... Try applying the same principles of the trespassers on private land to a trespassing in a literal home or buiding. Wouldn't the wizard or homeowner be justified in kicking people he does not want in his home out? If a person repeatedly enters the home and sleeps in a bedroom that isn't his. Or what if a trespasser enters the home and tears down walls or removes furniture they don't like to fix the home the way they like it. Violence will eventually result. Is it evil to kick people out of your home for trespassing or even to inflict harm on them after repeated warnings? Surely not! Neither should it be evil for booting out people who are destroying forests or other lands that you may own.

Lord Eldred
02-25-2002, 02:51 AM
Thanks for stating my argument so well :P

However, it would be evil if the people legitimately lived in the land and just because you are the province regent and want to increase your magic source you start kicking people out. It is like when China started relocating people by force so that they could build a hydroelectric plant. Totally wrong!

Riegan Swordwraith
02-25-2002, 04:18 AM
The US government beleived they were doing nothing wrong when they forced the varoius nations to move to reservations,some of which to areas totally foreign to them."Trail of Tears" anyone??

Now I don't see why a Wizard-Regent would want to get rid of the people in his provinces anyway,he would need the revenue from taxes to pay for his research,and if he is not a province ruler,is he just taking it upon himself to start kicking out people in another regents domain??To force relocate anyone in order to feed one's hunger for power,is inherently evil.

Green Knight
02-25-2002, 10:16 AM
Evil can be easily JUSTIFIED, but it stil doesn't make if any more RIGHT.

If the wizard warns the people to leave or he will be "forced" to kill them, he is doing an evil act. He has the choice NOT to threathen or kill, yet he still choses that path.

The only way to remove the people in a "good" way, would be to persuade them to leave because THEY want to.

Lord Eldred
03-01-2002, 01:05 AM
Hey Green Knight does that mean I can come over your house and move in while I build a new house in your back yard and so as not to be evil all you can do is try to persuade me to leave because I want to leave?

Green Knight
03-05-2002, 05:18 PM
I think I'll call the cops :)

Arch-Sorcerer Gargamel
03-05-2002, 09:26 PM
Evil is funny. (But it always wins, because Good is dumb).

[I'm a regent now! Hooray!]