Nobles and the Law [Archive]

kgauck

11-30-2007, 08:04 PM

This is a level of detail that the official materials didn't get into. My assumption is that there are two states, a feudal monarchy, and an administrative monarchy and that each domain is somewhere in the transition between the two. Then there are other types of government that can influence what the government of a domain looks like. Merchant republics, noble republics, despotisms, &c, &c.

A feudal monarchy is one where the ruler relies on their underlings to perform tasks locally. For example, Thuriene relies on the Earl of Freestead to protect the people of Freestead against the goblins of the Five Peaks, to be the first response to a large scale invasion, to maintain fortresses in the area, provide local justice, and so on. Holdings, military units, and other state instruments would be staffed or even run by the local Earl or his Lords and these would all acknowledge the Thane as their rightful overlord. The Thane may own little if anything in the provinces, and is entirely dependent on her vassals in any domain she runs in a feudal style to execute her will. In this case the people generally have more loyalty and attachment to the local lords or the provincial lord, and finally some regard for the domain ruler. But, the holdings tell if the lords are acting for themselves or if they are acting for their liege. In a domain like Talinie, if the law holdings of Freestead say Thuriene Donnals, then even if Torias is the law, he is upholding his vassal obligations and Thurien's will is done. If the local province rulers have their own holdings, they act for themselves regardless of oaths of vassalage.

In an administrative monarchy, the ruler has a staff of royal officials who carry out her will. In this case, Thuriene would have royal officials in Freestead to carry out her will and staff her holdings. In this case, the Earl of Freestead could effectively be nothing more than a rich private citizen with special privileges. He might earn extra money as an official in the Thane's government, or he might just manage his own private fortune. In this case, the Thane may own little if anything in the provinces, but have legal rights to act as a sovereign. In this case the liege is the only direct power, but the nobles have plenty of social power and respect.

In either case the domain owner can own plenty of land, but doesn’t have to. Owning land makes you a direct landlord, and you are always on the administrative side of things when you directly own land, and may or many not be feudal when you don’t

The listing of holdings for the NIT and the descriptions in Talinie say that it’s the NIT that really controls the law holdings, not the landed side of things, so 1) if they ever separated, the NIT would probably control the law, not the landed ruler, and 2) the people you see as judges, justices, and sheriffs are not nobles, knights, and their officials, but priests and their officials.

A domain like Talinie can also have aspects of being a theocracy, where the ruler can be forced to do the will of the temple doctrine rather than imposing their will on their own organization. A figure like Torias Griene can wield a lot of power this way, because if he can convincingly claim to know the word of Haelyn, he gets his way. In a realm like Boeruine, someone can argue that Haelyn wants this or that, but the way the Archduchy works, the Archduke’s will is done, not Haelyn’s. A temple realm could be either way, though some will accuse a ruler of being corrupt if they impose their will against the clear doctrine of the faith. Medieval Popes had this problem all the time, and a some religious rulers will just say that they are the boss and they know best, like it or lump it. Regency points spend the same no matter how they are used. Depending on what is exactly going on such a ruler might or might not have problems behaving this way (too many issues to go into on a post on nobility and the law).

A state like Endier might look like a hybrid of administrative monarchy and merchant republic. Ultimatly there are no republics because it’s a game of birthright, not government by the people, but there can certainly be republican aspects to a monarchy. A domain where the ruler has clear powers, but must get the support of a parliament, estates, or guild counsel to undertake certain acts. This could be a simple as requiring a free diplomacy action to be successful before getting high taxation. A lot of realms start out in a state of crisis, as described by the PS’s and getting the consent of noble counsels, assemblies of the commons, and such can be necessary until the ruler has established themselves as the guy who solved all these problems.

So, based on what the DM’s tastes are – knightly, medieval, feudal, or divine right, absolutist, one man rule, or divided government, parliaments, back room politicking - and what kind of realm is described, and what the DM knows about how governments work, you can devise different kinds of governments.

As a general rule, I imagine that most states are somewhere between feudal and aristocratic monarchies, and admix other kinds of governments as needed to create the right feel.

stv2brown1988

11-30-2007, 08:26 PM

Very well done Kgauck! I really like the way you explained it. Thanks.

Now then on to game mechanics...
Would the Thane and the NIT each roll separtely for random events and income/RP collection or are they the same entity?

If the vassels have their own holdings do they roll separately for random events and income/RP collection or are they the same entity? For example, in Rjurik there are many Jarls each with Law and some even have Guild holdings. Like Halskapa with seven jarls, would each roll separately for random events or would the King of Halskapa roll once and the DM assign the event to whatever province he/she chooses?

kgauck

11-30-2007, 09:09 PM

Generally I only roll random events for PC's, and just assume that NPC regents use a realm action to resolve their random events. Easier resolution. So if a PC is playing a count, jarl, or graf, then I give them "count-sized" random events, just like the regular ones but scaled down to the resources of the single province holder. Where a great captain might actually detach several holdings from a domain ruler, for a single province holder, maybe a single holding is contested. Where a domain ruler might get a random event where a unit of gnolls maurauds in a provicne, a single province ruler might get a single ogre, and a simple farmer gets a squirrel in his attic.

Otherwise I would give every player with a domain or a pseudo-domain (any organization that is like a domain, but has no actual holdings, say a PC plays Lord Marshal of the Armies of the realm run by another PC) a random event.

Let's imagine I have four players - a ruler of a landed domain, a ruler of a single province, the commander of the army, and a temple ruler - I would give each a random event. If players like them, I would give random events to regular PC's even with no organizations, but would scale them so that they don't require resources a player doesn't have.

For sake of comparison suppose each got a Diplomatic Matter:
The landed ruler might get visited by a neighboring realm seeking cooperation in a cause than directly concerns the neighbor and might indirectly effect the PC.
The temple ruler might get a visit from a another temple of the same faith asking to borrow a copy of a sacred text so they could copy it in their scriptorium.
The province ruler might be visited from the local guildmaster of the guilder who has guild holdings in his province asking for favors, concessions, or privledges. Their might be a GB in it if he's cooperative.
The commander of the army might be visited by a stranger who claims to have information about the army of a rival power, but wants to be paid for it. Its not secret information, but its stuff you would have to pay someone to go collect (like how many cavalry horses are in Riven), so you have to decide whether to buy this guy's information.

That way everyone has something to do, and each task fits their role. Oh, and the farmer is visited by a peddler who claims some cloth is blessed by Armicus the previous high priest of the temple domain run by the PC templar.

Sinister

12-01-2007, 06:54 PM

I'd like to point out stylistic differences between DMs. Many DMs will just have domain actions and random events rolled out.

If you are a good story teller all these random events can become full blown RPG events. I point to the excellent book on the Hero-kings from second edition that offered a full adventure for every random event.

When I have a party of PCs I often do seperate random events but if the oppertunity arises that I think one random event can affect them I'll work it into a full session.

kgauck

12-01-2007, 09:52 PM

There are good story reasons for just rolling out random events as well. In any good story, there are things that happen "off-screen" because they don't advance the main plot and slow down the pace of the story. This can be especially true if your group is short on gaming time.

At the pace of gaming we were moving at with my last group (this spring, died out in summer because of time problems) a simple 4 hour adventure would take two weeks because we had only 2 hours of play time per week. The group could be hot on the trail of the White Witch's agents, and then a random event puts bandits in Saerskap. Take two weeks out to resolve it?

I like to work some, if not most, random events into things that the players did, or didn't do, so that they aren't random from the point of view of the characters. But even if the White Witch did sponsor bandits in Saerskap, and those bandits are unusual in that they know the agent who put them up, two "ifs" so far, is it worth it to slow time the pace of the story which was based on tracking down some other agents of the White Witch?

When story is a consideration, knowing what should be off-screen can be as important as being able to make domain actions and random event into stories in the first place.

Sinister

12-01-2007, 10:39 PM

stv2brown1988

12-03-2007, 07:08 PM

I still don't know if the Thane of Talinie and the NIT are two separate domains or one? I read it as one domain. If two, then who runs NIT?

And do you roll random events for each or just one?

Another example of this situation, I think, is the Prince-paladin of Ariya?

Steve

By the way, I like to roll random events before play and insert them at any point within the domain turn.

Thelandrin

12-03-2007, 07:24 PM

The Thane of Talinie is the leader of the NIT, just like Guilder Kalien ruling both Endier and the Heartlands Outfitters and Suris Enlien as the mistress of both Medoere and the RCS.

irdeggman

12-03-2007, 07:26 PM

I still don't know if the Thane of Talinie and the NIT are two separate domains or one? I read it as one domain. If two, then who runs NIT?

Another example of this situation, I think, is the Prince-paladin of Ariya?

They are one domain (theocracies) just like Medoere.

I would never roll more for random events more than once for any regent. A domain is the power controlled by a regent - regardless of what holdings it is comprised of.

And do you roll random events for each or just one?
Steve

Random events rules are pretty open ended.

From the BRCS:
{Which is basically some "advice" from gamers over the years and pretty much matches what you favor to do.}

Generating events well in advance of the game calendar can give the DM time to plant "hints" that may allow players to better foresee and react to the impending event.

kgauck

12-03-2007, 07:50 PM

Its two domains run by the same person, so two random events.

Both domains are run by the same person.

I would also say that for random events, a very large single domain would have multiple random events. The principle of having a random event for provincial lords as well as domain rulers is that there is a certain amount of random stuff happening everywhere. If having a bigger realm means there are fewer random events per province, then there is more stability in the world, just because states are larger, and that doesn't follow.

One concept I use a lot is something I call a "region" which is any province and all adjacent provinces. That allows me to keep things more consistant than "a domain" which can vary dramatically in size. Now, most actual realms are roughly the size of a region (seven provinces) so I don't made adjustments for a 6 province realm or an 8 province realm, but for say, a 3 province realm, I would either want to make sure that I match a random event to a smaller realm (requiring a Diplomacy action from Medoere and from Avanil is not the same thing, Avanil has more money, but less time/province) or use fewer random events.

So while Medoere, is a small realm, its regent also runs the Celestial Spell, so I would tend to throw half as many (or less troublesome) random events at Medoere, but would also throw random events at the Celestial spell (again of a smaller nature or less frequent).

irdeggman

12-03-2007, 09:26 PM

Its two domains run by the same person, so two random events.

Both domains are run by the same person.

I would disagree.

BR Campaign setting rulebook pg 33:

"Domains are rarely made up of one kind of holding and usually include several elements.

A character's domain comprises any or all of the following:

- the provinces he rules

- holdings in his own provinces

- holdings in provinces ruled by other PCs or NPCs

- assets such as roads, castles, and armies"

"realms: The term realm refers to any domain that includes one or more provinces."

Many, many listed regents have holdings of more than 1 type - does this mean that they have multiple "domains" because of this?

AndrewTall

12-03-2007, 09:54 PM

kgauck

12-04-2007, 02:41 AM

I would disagree.
This is a rules definition, and I generally don't think rules are very useful, which is why I don't offer rules for solutions I describe.

The descriptive material offers us plenty of evidence of conflict between members of the Talinie organization (the nobles) and the NIT organization (the priests), and the existence of two sets of identifications - Talinie and NIT - and the lack of harmony between them, argues against seeing them as the same domain.

There are times when its best to see a domain as the organization of the regent, and given one regent, one domain. I would not think it neccesary to require the same domain actions for the NIT and Talinie to coordinate and interact as I would if both were run by two PC's who were in the same gaming group.

But for other purposes, for almost all role playing purposes, they are two domains which happen to be run by the same person.

Beruin

12-04-2007, 04:16 AM

I'm inclined to side with irdeggman with regard to Talinie, though for different reasons:

The Thane of Talinie is the leader of the NIT

I'd say its the other way around, the leader of the NIT is also the Thane of Talinie. Talinie as a theocratic realm is simply a territory ruled and administrated by the church, similar to the Papal states or any of the numerous ecclesiastic territories in medieval Germany. The rulership of the land is tied to the church hierarchy, and - barring any revolutionary changes - the two are inseparable. Thus, Talinie is only one domain, in my view.

In game terms, I don't really see a difference between a province ruler with law holdings, and a theocracy comprised of temple holdings as well as ruling provinces and law holding.

If I take my home town, one of the oldest bishop seats in Europe, as an example, the existence of secular nobles is not really an argument against this. These nobles are secular vassals of the bishop, err, Thane, they could hold offices in the realm's administration or simply be large landholders. In the case of Talinie, they probably pre-date the establishment of the NIT, and might in time be replaced by church officials. Or, a noble family or two might gain enough influence to often, if not always, select the head of the NIT from their midst.

But for other purposes, for almost all role playing purposes, they are two domains which happen to be run by the same person.

Well, I guess I can follow your line of thought, and while I disagree with regard to Talinie, a construction like this might be valid and useful for other realms like Endier, which indeed basically consists of two domains, the city of Endier and its surrounding territory and a 'private', profit-oriented merchant company.

kgauck

12-04-2007, 05:25 AM

Talinie was only united with NIT during the reign of Thuriene's mother, Thalia Armara, it is not a, like any of the territorial bishoprics, land originally administered by the Church with secular powers derived from the land.

Talinie was a Barony for a long time before the NIT merged with it.

The granting of temporal lands to spiritual lords was generally a way to protect the Bishops from becomming the pawns of the local lord, even in the case of the Papal States.

Talinie is basically married to the NIT, and I can certainly see that this union could dissolve and the nobles of Talinie secure a sucessor to Thuriene who is someone other than a priest of the NIT, let alone its heir.

stv2brown1988

12-04-2007, 09:40 AM

When I was trying to expand the random events table on the wiki (http://www.birthright.net/brwiki/index.php/User:AndrewTall/Random_events) I tried playing with altering the frequency tables to reflect the idea that larger holdings should have more happening in them - and incorporate a few other prejudices, the outcome was: http://www.birthright.net/brwiki/index.php/User:AndrewTall/Random_events_mechanics.

Neither has been play-tested so I'd be interested in any feedback.
Andrew,

I liked your idea and have made an Excel spreadsheet to include it into my domain tracking sheet. I'll post this Excel file now. I think it provides motive for Vassels. I haven't play tested it yet, but programming it into Excel gave me time to think about it. Hopefully I got it right.

Steve

stv2brown1988

12-04-2007, 09:46 AM

3eDomainTracker posted for download.

irdeggman

12-04-2007, 10:59 AM

This is a rules definition, and I generally don't think rules are very useful, which is why I don't offer rules for solutions I describe.

The descriptive material offers us plenty of evidence of conflict between members of the Talinie organization (the nobles) and the NIT organization (the priests), and the existence of two sets of identifications - Talinie and NIT - and the lack of harmony between them, argues against seeing them as the same domain.

There are times when its best to see a domain as the organization of the regent, and given one regent, one domain. I would not think it neccesary to require the same domain actions for the NIT and Talinie to coordinate and interact as I would if both were run by two PC's who were in the same gaming group.

But for other purposes, for almost all role playing purposes, they are two domains which happen to be run by the same person.

So it is vastly different than Medoere?

Or Ariya?

Do you give the players 2 Domain Record sheets?

Do they get 2 sets of domain actions?

Does he have 2 different sets of domain power?

Do the "incomes" (GB and RP) mix and make 1 pool or are they kept entirely separate?

All of these are ramifications of placing 2 domains under 1 regent.

And yes it is a rules definition (matched by rules mechanics).

The point of the line from the rules (which is more color than actual mechanic):

"Domains are rarely made up of one kind of holding and usually include several elements."

Is to reflect the different "elements" and different kinds of holdings that a single regent controls in his domain.

The use of the word element encompases the different political aspects you are bringing up.

Otherwise almost all landed regents actually rule multiple domains.

Endier - 1 is the land and law itself and the other is the vast trade network.

Illien - sources and land

Any landed source regent falls under the break up of domains, etc.

kgauck

12-04-2007, 05:23 PM

First let's agree that there is a difference between rules (which are a sad neccesity) and role playing, (which is what the game is really all about), and that things which are the same in the rules doen't have to be the same in the role play world. Most weapons have very similar or identical stats (d8 damage, x2 or x3 threat), but no matter how often you reproduce the weapons tables, you won't convince me that they should be described the same way in the game.

Second, you seem to think that holding types have something to do with this. I don't know where you got the idea that I see a Talinie / NIT division because of holding types. If one care's to read the history of the NIT (found not only in the Talinie PS, but now on the wiki as well) we find that during the so-called wasted centuries, various factions of priests fought, allied with useful nobles. Fitzalan unified the priests and formed the NIT. But what of we were playing a game where this had just happened? It would be useful to say we might have as many domains as their were factions, unified, perhaps only temporarily by the single regent. "Can you unify the temples like Fitzalan did?"

Any temple domain with different ideologies, conflicting sets of identities, and recognizably different sets of organizations, even though all the holdings are of one type, can usefully be described as two domains.

It just happens that the two different organizations have different holding types, but that's a coincidence. What is important is that of the regent forgets she has two distinct constituancies to please, these two organizations will split.

Seperate data sheets and treasuries? That would depend on how bad the division was, how close to schism the two organizations were. I would never make the players do that (indeed any implication that the role play stuff should be mirrored in rules and mechanics is pure tedium). But a wise player might decide its prudent to keep track of who brought what into an organization that contains members who would resent too much of the resources going to "the other guy's" projects. Spending several seasons of Talinie's tax income on a luxurious temple while ignoring state projects would be a real problem for unity in the realm.

From a strict rules perspective, there is nothing mechanically that says Talinie and the NIT are two organizations. From a role playing perspective, I don't know how you can read the Talinie PS and not see tension and conflict within Thuriene Donalls organization. The best domestic conflicts in any realm pit two constituancies against one another. Who does the ruler please, and can he make everyone satisfied? Good problems for united realms, hybrid realms, realms on the brink of splitting up.

Great captain events can be resolved by random selections of holdings in random provinces, or they can make use of already fleshed out clevages in a player's organization.

At the end of this post it dawns on me that it really comes down to whether you want to empasize the player's emersion into the character's experience, or encourage meta-game thinking instead. If I could do it, I wouldn't tell the players what game system I was using so that they would focus on their characters rather than on the rules (you know, "rule" is a four letter word).

At the end of the day, I need some way to keep track of how bad the hit was, how much money the province earned, or how many times you can try to out bid the other guy, but to try and understand what a domain is and how it works by looking to the rules, instead of the PS descriptions sounds more like Risk than it does any role playing game.

irdeggman

12-04-2007, 06:14 PM

Kenneth,

I can't disagree with "viewpoints".

And some of that can be used to explain "how things may work behind the scenes".

But the question asked was (and it was interpreted (at least by me) as being a rules-based question and not a philoshical one) - especially when looking at the connection to Ariya:

I still don't know if the Thane of Talinie and the NIT are two separate domains or one? I read it as one domain. If two, then who runs NIT?

And do you roll random events for each or just one?

Another example of this situation, I think, is the Prince-paladin of Ariya?

Now it really doesn't matter how it happened but at the moment both the NIT and the province are ruled by the same person - hence the same domain.

Domain is a way of measuring "personal power". How one handles one aspect has a direct relationship with the others. Regents are associated with all they hold and rule.

Almost all of Cerilia is fraught with strife and conflicts (hence the one of the basic constructs of the game - and directly linked to the title of the Anuire sourcebook "Ruins of Empire".

The comparison to the paladin-prince of Ariya is a great example. So is the paladin ruler of Elinie. Every paladin ruler would be torn between duty to the state and duty to their deity. Why does this need to be reflected via different "domains"? It makes no sense mechanically or even common sense-wise to split things up so. It will only serve to make the domain level of play that more complex (mechanically) when it is already a difficult thing to handle overall.

IMO - rolling more than one random event for a single regent is just plain harsh. This would keep the player constantly dealing with them, regardless of domain size or structure.

ConjurerDragon

12-04-2007, 06:45 PM

irdeggman schrieb:
> This post was generated by the Birthright.net message forum.
> You can view the entire thread at:
> http://www.birthright.net/forums/showthread.php?goto=newpost&t=4073
> irdeggman wrote:
> Kenneth,
>
> I can`t disagree with "viewpoints".
>
> And some of that can be used to explain "how things may work behind the scenes".
>
> But the question asked was (and it was interpreted (at least by me) as being a rules-based question and not a philoshical one) - especially when looking at the connection to Ariya:
>
>
>
> ------------ QUOTE ----------
> I still don`t know if the Thane of Talinie and the NIT are two separate domains or one? I read it as one domain. If two, then who runs NIT?
>
> And do you roll random events for each or just one?
>
> Another example of this situation, I think, is the Prince-paladin of Ariya?
> -----------------------------
>
>
>
> Now it really doesn`t matter how it happened but at the moment both the NIT and the province are ruled by the same person - hence the same domain.
>
> Domain is a way of measuring "personal power". How one handles one aspect has a direct relationship with the others. Regents are associated with all they hold and rule.
>
> Almost all of Cerilia is fraught with strife and conflicts (hence the one of the basic constructs of the game - and directly linked to the title of the Anuire sourcebook "Ruins of Empire".
>
> The comparison to the paladin-prince of Ariya is a great example. So is the paladin ruler of Elinie. Every paladin ruler would be torn between duty to the state and duty to their deity. Why does this need to be reflected via different "domains"? It makes no sense mechanically or even common sense-wise to split things up so. It will only serve to make the domain level of play that more complex (mechanically) when it is already a difficult thing to handle overall.
>
> IMO - rolling more than one random event for a single regent is just plain harsh. This would keep the player constantly dealing with them, regardless of domain size or structure.
>
Or it would emphasize that no single ruler can rule a huge realm
consisting of different holding types alone without huge and numerous
problems.

That is one of the answers to the question why the Gorgon has not taken
over all of Anuire already. Speaking in 2E terms even he is limited to 3
actions and the random events of all of Anuire under his direct rule
would be impossible to deal with.

It also emphasizes the value of vassals who have actions of their own to
take care for local random events.

stv2brown1988

12-04-2007, 07:13 PM

IMO - rolling more than one random event for a single regent is just plain harsh. This would keep the player constantly dealing with them, regardless of domain size or structure.

Thanks for answering my question.

To play out the differences between the two sides of the domain, NIT and Talinie, I guess I should mix up the random events that are rolled. One domain turn the random event affects NIT, the next Talnine holdings. What do you guys think?

Maybe after a Great Captain random event, I could roll twice for random events, one for each side, as a way to spice up the division between the two. I mean look what's going on with the government of Belgium in RL right now.

Steve

Sinister

12-04-2007, 07:33 PM

geeman

12-04-2007, 08:49 PM

At 10:14 AM 12/4/2007, irdeggman wrote:

>IMO - rolling more than one random event for a single regent is just
>plain harsh. This would keep the player constantly dealing with
>them, regardless of domain size or structure.

Hence the need for a regent to at some point start breaking up his
domain amongst Vassals, each of whom have then their own set of
random events to deal with. That and the fact that a Regent isn`t
going to collect RP after the size of his domain levels equal his
bloodline score....

In any case, the number of random events really should be based on
the size of domain features, but the rules assume that domains are
going to be of middling size and do not address this issue. After
all, Darian Avan should have more events within his realm to address
than a regent who controls only a few guild holding levels, right?

Ideally, random events really should exist in their own little
subset, arising from population and source potential levels and
affecting ALL regents who control domains within an affected
area. After all, events don`t occur in isolation, and they don`t
only occur as often in one place as another. it`s hard to imagine a
regent who controls temple holdings being that directly bothered by a
"Trade Matter" random event, while a "Blood Challenge" is going to
probably only directly affect one regent, but any regent whose realm
occurs in or around a "Festival" or "Natural Event" might need to pay
attention to that situation.

Gary

kgauck

12-04-2007, 11:03 PM

Some of that can be used to explain "how things may work behind the scenes".
I'm afraid its the mechanics that happen behind the scenes, the roleplaying is foreground.

But the question asked was (and it was interpreted (at least by me) as being a rules-based question and not a philoshical one) - especially when looking at the connection to Ariya.
Maybe it was, but as ConjurerDragon points out, the more realms you control, the more stable things become, which is backwards. Bigger realms have more going on, not less.

Now it really doesn't matter how it happened but at the moment both the NIT and the province are ruled by the same person - hence the same domain.
For what purposes? For bookkeeping and simple accounting, sure, I agree. For understanding how to roleplay conflicts within Talinie, you've just ironed away all the differences. Players should inhabit a world where Talinie and the NIT seem distinct, because they have separate histories, identities, aims, and because they will conflict over how to manage resources.

Domain is a way of measuring "personal power". How one handles one aspect has a direct relationship with the others. Regents are associated with all they hold and rule.
This definition is useful for explaining the game to a new person. Its an over-simplification that can't come to terms with all the manifest ways that humans actually govern one another. All rules simplify and abstract things to make game play flow swiftly and easily, but who wants to reside in a game where things end with the rules-friendly understanding of a realm?

Almost all of Cerilia is fraught with strife and conflicts (hence the one of the basic constructs of the game - and directly linked to the title of the Anuire sourcebook "Ruins of Empire".
But the BR system doesn't explain any of this. It explains how a domain collects GB, Regency, and manages how realms conflict in very abstract ways - the realm actions. Nothing in the rules explains why domains conflict of what the nature of that conflict would look or feel like. So you might understand why "I contest his holding in Greensward" gives you no idea what is actually going on. We have a nice system to explain how and when I can apply my organization and its GB and RP to oppose another organization to consume his GB and RP, and maybe destroy a few levels of holding, but that's it.

The comparison to the paladin-prince of Ariya is a great example. So is the paladin ruler of Elinie. Every paladin ruler would be torn between duty to the state and duty to their deity. Why does this need to be reflected via different "domains"?
It doesn't. You've mistaken a character role play issue for a setting (in the dramatic sense) issue. The conflict that is important to the DM, is how various parts of the domain get along. Factions ready to do harm to one another within a domain can usefully be described as two domains so that you can regulate the conflict between them. There are rules for conflict between realms, what rules are there for conflict within realms?

It makes no sense mechanically or even common sense-wise to split things up so. It will only serve to make the domain level of play that more complex (mechanically) when it is already a difficult thing to handle overall.
I am not advocating doing the additional paperwork of splitting realms, I'm talking about how NPC's see their organizations. Its a different thing entirely.

IMO - rolling more than one random event for a single regent is just plain harsh. This would keep the player constantly dealing with them, regardless of domain size or structure.
That's because you see a random event as a means to a punative mechanic, and I see a random event as a promt to action. In standard D&D the players are adrift in a world of possibilities, so DM's create hooks to engage players interests. BR shouldn't work this way. The world should create so many things to respond to that players have the opposite problem, because there is not enough time to respond to all the issues an optimum state could address. I could hardly object to 10 random events per season. If I had to time to flesh this many random events out and put at least the outline of an adventure behind each one, I would do it. Then I would just adapt the mechanic to suit what I was doing. What is important is that however you do the random events, the risk and reward is comensorate with the resources of the domain. If you are just applying the rules as written, then I know you're not doing that, and going easy on some domains and being too hard on others.

AndrewTall

12-04-2007, 11:11 PM

If using my random events checker - or any similar system based on size of holding - you could divide the odds of an event into slabs - i.e a large realm has a 45% chance of a random event, of which 35% comes from province/law and 10% from temple. Thus on a roll of 01-35 you have a province/law random event and 36-45 you get a temple random event. Hmm, my inner maths geek is showing :o

In terms of multiple domains I'd keep the stress internal - we know it's there, as the game dictates it can be dormant or active (i.e. the domain is storming away everyone is happy, the domain loses a major battle, is suffering harshly for some reason and the cracks start to show). So if for example Boeruine started to crack down on the NIT with taxes and the like. the nobles of Talinie might complain about the amount of funds going south to win support for the faith, if harvests are poor and taxes suffer the church starts complaining about how the tithes of the faithful are subsidising the trappings of state and all those idle nobles...

I like the idea of not explaining the game system to players - one of the best D&D games I ever played the DM kept the character sheets - we got told 'wow that blow really kncocked you back' and the like but never really knew how strong/weak we were compared to our foes - it kept us on our toes constantly! It doesn't work so well with some players (those who love to crunch the odds etc) and is even more work for the hard-pressed GM but can be a lot of fun.

irdeggman

12-05-2007, 01:10 AM

I'm afraid its the mechanics that happen behind the scenes, the roleplaying is foreground.

Not really at the domain level. That level is elevated to teh 10,000 ft level which makes the little things that characters do individually ahve little impact.

Maybe it was, but as ConjurerDragon points out, the more realms you control, the more stable things become, which is backwards. Bigger realms have more going on, not less.

And I don't disagree with that at all.

If a regent governs many different holdings he can not focus on all of them at once. The "mechanics" work to keep that in check. In Talanie for example if the thane dedicated attention to the the province related stuff (roads, armies, even law holdings) then attention to the temple aspect gets put to the side. This opens that up to "outside" influence and "contesting". Since the thane has used up her actions she can't "contest" those new temple holdings that are serving as the bae for this new "unrest".

No reason what so ever to treat them as separate "domains" only as part of the many things that need attention.

This definition is useful for explaining the game to a new person. Its an over-simplification that can't come to terms with all the manifest ways that humans actually govern one another. All rules simplify and abstract things to make game play flow swiftly and easily, but who wants to reside in a game where things end with the rules-friendly understanding of a realm?

But it is much better than the fuzzy logic being applied that seemingly separates parts of domains into separate domains based on how the DM sees it. If that logic is not applied to all domains and regents then it looses it's advantage. Saying that Medoere is too small to be split into separate domains - when it has many "similar" issues going on (Endier and Diemed for example) is seemingly a hand wave approach to what a DM wants to do.

But the BR system doesn't explain any of this. It explains how a domain collects GB, Regency, and manages how realms conflict in very abstract ways - the realm actions. Nothing in the rules explains why domains conflict of what the nature of that conflict would look or feel like. So you might understand why "I contest his holding in Greensward" gives you no idea what is actually going on. We have a nice system to explain how and when I can apply my organization and its GB and RP to oppose another organization to consume his GB and RP, and maybe destroy a few levels of holding, but that's it.

But separating things into separate domains doesn't help either it just makes the "problem" you are listing as even more widespread since it now applies to many more situations.

It doesn't. You've mistaken a character role play issue for a setting (in the dramatic sense) issue. The conflict that is important to the DM, is how various parts of the domain get along. Factions ready to do harm to one another within a domain can usefully be described as two domains so that you can regulate the conflict between them. There are rules for conflict between realms, what rules are there for conflict within realms?

Hmmm the same ones?

The rules on how to handle "attitude" or "loyatly" and "agitation" as a domain action.

The actions of an individual on his own have little impact on the rest of the world. Regents get domain actions because they "involve" many other peopel in what they are doing.

I am not advocating doing the additional paperwork of splitting realms, I'm talking about how NPC's see their organizations. Its a different thing entirely.

NPCs and PCs should be functioning the same on this aspect. I don't understand why you would want to treat them separately.

That's because you see a random event as a means to a punative mechanic, and I see a random event as a promt to action. In standard D&D the players are adrift in a world of possibilities, so DM's create hooks to engage players interests. BR shouldn't work this way. The world should create so many things to respond to that players have the opposite problem, because there is not enough time to respond to all the issues an optimum state could address. I could hardly object to 10 random events per season. If I had to time to flesh this many random events out and put at least the outline of an adventure behind each one, I would do it. Then I would just adapt the mechanic to suit what I was doing. What is important is that however you do the random events, the risk and reward is comensorate with the resources of the domain. If you are just applying the rules as written, then I know you're not doing that, and going easy on some domains and being too hard on others.

But anything that calls the regent to action (not in what he was planning on doing) - which in most player's case is the Brain's philosophy "the same as it is every day 'trying to take over the world' " - is punative since it draws his resources away from his "original plan".

And historically (based on all of the games that I've run) regents have far too much to do and too little time to do it in without responding to more random events. I try to keep track of NPC domains in the same area and their actions too - which are in no way random events. These actions keep the PC regents so busy that they have to stretch their resources to the limit - even when I try to make it simple.

I guess you should give your definition of what a domain is so that we will at least have an understanding of the basic foundation we are each coming from.

irdeggman

12-05-2007, 01:14 AM

well there's also the matter of how you keep players engaged. I do domain turns "between adventures" allowing the players to come to me with their turn so it's not taking up someone's game time.

2 random events that are being role-played out (granted I know most people just roll it and not role it) would take awhile.

I like the idea of alternating the problems or presenting the player with envelope A or B for their random event. Then just resolve one.

And that is pretty much how I always tried to run my games.

I tried to get the players to do domain actions via e-mail so I could concentrate on adventures when we all got together at the table.

People tend to get bored waiting on some other player's domain actions - especially when they don't invole theri character at all.

Some domain actions absolutely have to be done at the table - but quite a lot can be done electronically.

Beruin

12-05-2007, 04:35 AM

First let's agree that there is a difference between rules (which are a sad neccesity) and role playing, (which is what the game is really all about), and that things which are the same in the rules don't have to be the same in the role play world.

Agreed.

From a strict rules perspective, there is nothing mechanically that says Talinie and the NIT are two organizations. From a role playing perspective, I don't know how you can read the Talinie PS and not see tension and conflict within Thuriene Donalls organization. The best domestic conflicts in any realm pit two constituancies against one another.

Domain is a way of measuring "personal power". How one handles one aspect has a direct relationship with the others. Regents are associated with all they hold and rule.

I guess you should give your definition of what a domain is so that we will at least have an understanding of the basic foundation we are each coming from.

I guess part of this debate stems from using the term 'domain' to describe different things. Kenneth already introduced the term 'organization', and this might be more fitting for what he describes as it's not so closely tied to the BR rules, though both terms might be interchangeable too some degree:

The question is: Does Thuriene Donalls control two organizations or just one and how do the locals perceive this?

I believe that both views, Kenneth' and mine, are basically valid. The answer depends on how strongly rooted in Talinie's society you perceive the NIT. Do the locals still feel that they are living in a secular barony that just happens to be ruled by priest or do they perceive Talinie and the NIT as one entity?

And how is the realm ruled below the domain level? Is the administration done through the church hierarchy or by local lords? For example, if taxes are regularly collected by priests, sooner or later many commoners would see the NIT priests as representatives of Talinie, and though this might not increase the popularity of the church, it would foster a stronger sense of unity between the land and the church.

In effect, your answers depend on how you want to describe both the realm and the church.
Granted I haven't reread the PS prior to posting, so Kenneth might be closer to the mark, but from what I recall (and from the wiki) the information is sketchy enough that there is no exclusively true 'official' answer to the above questions.

Okay, I feel I'm riding the fence here, but I believe Endier does provide an easier and more clear cut example of one regent ruling two organizations or domains. A commoner in Endier sees his ruler as the head of the Endieran Council and the civil bureaucracy and that is what he is concerned with. He also knows that his count is filthy rich and controls a vast trade network, but he has no insight into or contact with this organization (apart from buying his bread and butter from the merchant next door).

Here, more clearly than in the Talinie/NIT issue, the domain rules (over-)simplify things for the sake of convenience. Guilder Kalien probably keeps the administration and the finances of Endier and Heartlands Outfitters separate and has separate records for both his organizations. He can draw on resources from both organizations, and thus the domain rules lump both together.

However, depending on what he wants to do, he'll finance his actions from different coffers. A road built within Endier would be financed by the civil bureaucracy, while the money to finance a trade war would come from Heartlands Outfitters.
Reasonably, it could even be assumed that the two are separate domains with their own headquarters, i.e. courts, but this would increase the maintenance cost.

Sinister

12-05-2007, 05:59 AM

I like the idea of not explaining the game system to players - one of the best D&D games I ever played the DM kept the character sheets - we got told 'wow that blow really kncocked you back' and the like but never really knew how strong/weak we were compared to our foes - it kept us on our toes constantly! It doesn't work so well with some players (those who love to crunch the odds etc) and is even more work for the hard-pressed GM but can be a lot of fun.

Generally speaking, (as I GM over 12 different RPGs) I find that players have more fun and so does the GM in games where the players don't know the rules. I've found this statement to be true in almost every RPG I've ever played or ran. It has something to do with the fact that without rules knowledge the players can only be "in character". The look for ways to operate within the scope of character interaction.

In the case of DnD I can safely say that most of the time I prefer other RPGs to it because the players aren't given a "player's rulebook". Birthright and Ravenloft may be the only reasons why I'll ever play DnD.

irdeggman

12-05-2007, 11:33 AM

Thanks for answering my question.

To play out the differences between the two sides of the domain, NIT and Talinie, I guess I should mix up the random events that are rolled. One domain turn the random event affects NIT, the next Talnine holdings. What do you guys think?

Maybe after a Great Captain random event, I could roll twice for random events, one for each side, as a way to spice up the division between the two. I mean look what's going on with the government of Belgium in RL right now.

Steve

What I would do - is roll 1 random event for the regent.

Depending on the result and how the regent has been focusing his/her attention in the past would determine what specifically happens and where (as in what aspect of the domain) to apply it to.

This puts the random events back into the hands of the DM (as always intended), has the DM make determinations of the attitude/loyalty of the domain (and parts of it) (also as always intended) and then gives the DM an opportunity to insert future (or effects from past) events.

IMO random events are deliberately "vague" in what they entail and are designed to reflect "pressures", "ramifications of actions or inactions" and "introductions of story arcs".

Personally I have always hated random encounters and see the random events structure as an off shoot of that poor concept.

IMO random events are rarely "random" and do not happen with the frequency that D&D has enforced - either on the domain scale or on the encounter scale. They should be used primarily for "background filler" and to "introduce new things and directions" but should not be the focus of the game, which they tend to do if handled per the book. Applying more than 1 random event to single character only goes to enforce this to an extreme.

I have a friend who runs a game (that I left due in part to this issue) who had very little to no story arc built in. The sessions were once random encounter after another - all unrelated to anything going on in the rest of the "world". When combined with his enforcement of the 3.5 training options and spending gp to gain class level benefits this crippled the game - since there is in general very little "treasure" associated with random encounters. I quite the game in order to maintain our friendship since we were becoming more and more argumentative about his "house-rules" and how they were not at all though out or applied, and they were routinely inserted at the "last minute".

stv2brown1988

12-05-2007, 12:04 PM

When you begin a new game, do you develop a story arc for each NPC regent that is within or near the PC's realms? Or do you try to work the NPC regent's in one at atime?

irdeggman

12-05-2007, 12:37 PM

When you begin a new game, do you develop a story arc for each NPC regent that is within or near the PC's realms? Or do you try to work the NPC regent's in one at atime?

I give major NPCs a "reason" and "motive" for what they do.

Most of the rest stays "behind the scenes" and I adjust them based on what is going on with the PCs.

I do not, however, specifically have NPCs target PCs - unless there is a "background" reason for so doing.

That is I work in the PCs "background" into their relationship with the major NPCs.

I require my players to give me a background of the chracter before play. Where they came from, what major things they've done to justify what they are and what feats, skills, classes they have. I also give an xp award based on this.

For example in my last 2nd ed game - I had one PC be the regnet of Roesone, one the prefect of the IHH, one a paladin of Cuircean (from nearby Osoerde), one the regent of Endier and 2 be guild regents.

I gave each of them staring holding, GB and RP to "balance" the players out.

I adjusted each's background submitted to better mesh with each other.

The Roesone regent - ended up being the the "true love of Marlae" and her former chief of the guard. When she died as reulst of incursions of the spider's forces things happened. Her brother was the PC's "best friend" as part of his background. The investiture failed to transfer to the borther and the land chose the PC instead. The brother went into exile (but reappeared much later to aid is "best friend". The former prefect of the IHH went into self-imposed exile and turned things over to his "chief assistant" the.

The land rejected the brother because he was not worthy yet. Marlae was pregnant when she died, with the PC's child (unknown to all prior to the death). The Roesone regent PC, the IHH regent PC and the former prefect all knew about this "bastard child". And thus one of the "secrets". This set up a lot of built in motivations.

The paladin PC was sent to Roesone by his higher ups for safety (he was being targeted by Jason Renach for supporting William Moergan. Basically the temples in Osoerde were split up and the paladin received some but still tentatively served the prefect in Osoerde (a sort of semi-vassel arrangement).

The Endier split up was very complicated. The accidental death of Guilder Kalien" and the split up of his domain to his three surviving chief Lts contained a lot of built in motivation and intrigue.

I started out with the landed regent getting a Lt (that was the chief NPC in Blood Hungary) - so that advneture was set up early on.

So a lot of things were "set up" early and how they played out depended on the PC's actions.

stv2brown1988

12-05-2007, 02:19 PM

For example in my last 2nd ed game - I had one PC be the regnet of Roesone, one the prefect of the IHH, one a paladin of Cuircean (from nearby Osoerde), one the regent of Endier and 2 be guild regents.
...
So a lot of things were "set up" early and how they played out depended on the PC's actions.

I think I'm starting to get it how this all works together, thanks. During this game, by your setup/design who were the major NPC regents that the PCs were allied with? Who were the enemy regents?
.....
I guess I don't know the proper balance for NPC actions. To me, an NPC regent would spend his first several actions maxing out holding levels where possible. Just like I would as a player. Do you have regents jump into espionage/diplomacy actions first, then work on raising holding levels before getting around to contest actions?

irdeggman

12-05-2007, 05:32 PM

I think I'm starting to get it how this all works together, thanks. During this game, by your setup/design who were the major NPC regents that the PCs were allied with? Who were the enemy regents?
.....

I almost always start with a large diplomatic "party" where the "new" regents are being set up - basically just after their investiture.

I make them spend their first action on Diplomacy. This was a good chance for role-playing by introducing the major NPC regents.

But they can accomplish a lot of specific actions with this first one.

I had the regents from the surrounding realms all show up. Most were looking to set up a continuance of their "arrangements" with the former regents. O previous "arrangement" was considered still applicable until "agreed to" with the new regents. Some were looking for "better deals" or even some "deals" at all.

I had the new PC regent of Endier trying to set up a trade agreement with the Queen of Aerenwe. But when he brought up lumbering from the Queen's territories, things went south quickly. This set the tone for the relationship between those two Regents from that point on, while the new Regent of Roesone took a different tact and tried to ensure some sort of mutal defense alliance and most definitely never touch the Erbannian. Got good marks from the Queen on his insistance to that point.

I guess I don't know the proper balance for NPC actions. To me, an NPC regent would spend his first several actions maxing out holding levels where possible. Just like I would as a player. Do you have regents jump into espionage/diplomacy actions first, then work on raising holding levels before getting around to contest actions?

It depends on the situation. IMG I basically used the regents and domains as written in the Ruins of Empire and made some adjustments accordingly.

Never, ever underestimate the importance of Diplomacy. It can accomplish more things that people think of at first glance.

Sinister

12-05-2007, 05:37 PM

I'm getting ready to start a 12 player two kingdom game. here's what I've done so far:

1. I choose Endier and Medoere as kingdoms because they are close to each other (but not next door) and they are two good center's of politics and there were two sourcebooks done on them. Also while they can certainly wage war on each other, the have a lot of common enemies (spider, ghoere, possibly diemed).

2. Reorganized the realms a bit to fit the players choices of characters, so for instance in Medoere I dropped the power of the RCS just a little to make it possible for my haelyn paladin to compete for some temple holdings.

3. Came up with an idea of which character's will eventually rule and why made sure that all characters would have a semi easy time of establishing holdings (dealing with 90% new players)

My game will basically run like this. Once every two weeks I'll meet with a realm to run an adventure, after that adventure they have until the next adventure to take a domain action. This action is scheduled with me and they have two choices:

1. Just take 10 minutes tell me what they want to do and roll it. While not my favorite option I am dealing with a bunch of 30 year olds playing who have real lives and things to do.

2. Role play out your domain turn which could take 2-4 hours but you get XP for role playing.

Basically means that I'm rewarding people who put in the time and effort with xp but I'm not nerfing holdings because people don't have time. Hopefully the system will encourage more people to take the time to RPG things out. Typically I roll random events a couple days before I meet with people and do random events then to.

kgauck

12-05-2007, 08:18 PM

When you begin a new game, do you develop a story arc for each NPC regent that is within or near the PC's realms? Or do you try to work the NPC regent's in one at atime?

Both. You can have a general idea what a regent is going to want to do, and build some broad arcs pretty quickly, but once the players start taking action it becomes easy to start refining and developing the NPC's and what they are doing. I generally put NPC's into one of three categories, friend, enemy, could-go-either-way. And I put could-go-either-way NPC's in organizations belonging to friends and enemies. This allows the PC's to solidify relationships by winning over NPC's who were ambivilant, or turn around enemies because of friends they made there, or even lose an ally because of enemies made.

So, then I try and introduce the other regents one at a time. It can be easier to do them all at once using a marriage event (like in the back of Ruins of Empire) or the Sword and the Crown, but generally its too much to take in, and the NPC's don't get properly fleshed out. Doing it one at a time works best.

Once the PC's know their neighbors, generally they start the ball rolling and keep it rolling on their own. As you might have surmised, I like to keep more balls in the air than many DM's, because otherwise the world looks exceptionally calm. Consider that if the only events that go on happen at the PC's pace of action (three or four actions per season) then one really must wonder if the neighbors spend their whole lives napping. Take Roesone, for example. Diemed is a hostile enemy who wants to recapture his lost provinces (most of Roesone, Diemed, and Ilien). You can expect he'll be bothering Roesone a lot. Then there is Ghoere. Ghoere has other enemies and projects, so he might menace Roesone about a third of the time (including things that don't require action, like improving fortifications on his side of the border). So that should occupy Roesone full time. But our ruler has two allies and a friendly neutral nearby and a small border with Osoerde, a bad boy realm who won't directly threaten Roesone (at least at the start) but might make the neighborhood more dangerous. Allies make demands on their friends time. This is the realm equivalent of asking for help on moving day, asking to be picked up at the auto shop, watch my dog while I'm out of town, and so on. You can say no to this stuff, but if you always say no, your friends start looking for better friends. A lot of this is nicely handled with random events.

For those of us who would use a lot of random events, use this example. I roll a serious one -say assasination- and I like it, but I also think I don't want to put it to close to the regent, because we already have things to do and I don't want to derail that. So the assasination takes place in a friendly realm, say Medoere, and a minor official, say a sheriff, is killed. Evidence (letters, a badge, a gasped last word, an eyewitness) links the assassin back to Roesone. The object here is for the regent to take a moment and delegate. I think that irdeggman is assuming that all random events take a domain action and impose penalties for failure, but it doesn't have to be that way. Once in a while I use random events that require adventure actions and risk a loss of regency, but most of the time I see a random event as being a way to describe the world around the players so that they learn more about their fellow regents (and the way the world works) without having to deal directly with them. So back to my example, maybe I decide that el-Hadid is behind the assassination because the sheriff was about to expose some criminal activities of Port of Call Exchange (smuggling, say). The PC might decide to do nothing (sorry, busy), in which case relations with Medoere decline slightly. In this case the assassination is never solved. The PC might delegate, telling local law officials to cooperate and investigate. In this case, several months later (depending on dice) some law official tells the PC that the assassination is solved, explains it all to the PC, and the PC has now given minor aide to Medoere and knows something about el-Hadid. Or the PC can get directly involved, solve the mystery as an adventure and impress Medoere with the value of friendship with the PC. I think there should be a lot of events like this, small events that test the PC's reaction, and teaches the PC about the neighbors without putting the PC in an act or pay-for-it situation.

Based on player reactions to each of their NPC neighbors, you will start to get story ideas for each of them. Some may directly involve the PC's, some may involve them directly, others will take place on their other side of their realm.

Here is another example of how I keep the world busy without requiring action from the PC's. Osoerde can menace Aerenwe with contest actions and espionage actions, and there are always rumors of war. Roesone will probably prefer a strong Aerenwe as a neighbor to an enlarged Osoerde (although players can surprise you) and will feel at least a little pressure to bolster Osoerede at least once in a while. Osoerde might frame Roesone for things every now and then, might use Roesone as a base to spy on Aerenwe, and might put bandits in the Erbannien through Roesone. So while all of this is easy to ignore, since Roesone might never be harmed, many PC's will feel like they should help. Especially if you paint Jaison Raenech as especially villainous.

The key to keeping the world busy without overtaxing the world is to make a lot of stuff happeing on the perifery of the PC's world. If you make the ruler the center of your thinking about what is happening in the world (random events per ruler, consequences for the ruler, number turns available for the ruler) then there isn't much happening. If you think instead about the domain as the center of what is happening, you still want to be aware of what the ruler can handle (resources, including time) but you can spend time describing stuff that's happening because 1) it makes the world seem more real, 2) it explains how you will do stuff without giving the players a rulebook and 3) it is a way to describe all of the other rulers without handing someone a book.