Playing along the Tael Firth

[InVinoVeritas]

I'm trying to start a combo PBEM/FTF Birthright campaign, and I plan to use the Tael Firth as the starting grounds. All PCs are regents. I like the area because it is a good spot to combine the separate cultures of the Anuireans and the Rjurik. I had a couple questions:

Would 2e or 3.5e work better, in your opinion?

How do jarls affect the running of Rjurik domains?

How have others run cross-cultural regions before?

[Sorontar]

Have a look at http://www.birthright.net/forums/showthread.php?t=1682

Sorontar

[Sorontar]

I always took the jarls of Stjordvik to be vassals. They pay tithes to the king but play important parts in the government of the kingdom. Inside their own province, they do what they like (within reason).

If they want to interfere with the running of another province, they should be allowed to, but the king could deinvest them and pass the control of the province to someone-else. Of course, the king would need the approval of the government before that happened.

Sorontar

[kgauck]

Everything depends on what you mean by running the domain. If you mean politics, I would certainly say yes.

I ran a complete campaign on the Tael Firth, mostly around Stjordvik, Dhoesone, and Talinie.

Contact zones are nice because it easily explains characters from both cultures, and creates reasons to visit back and forth.

[rjurikwinds]

I'm trying to start a combo PBEM/FTF Birthright campaign, and I plan to use the Tael Firth as the starting grounds. All PCs are regents. I like the area because it is a good spot to combine the separate cultures of the Anuireans and the Rjurik.
Great! totally love the Taelfirth/Taelshore - I personally ran a PBEM (no tabletop though). Really kgauck is the foremost expert on this region/setting.


I had a couple questions:
Would 2e or 3.5e work better, in your opinion?
I'm partial, I prefer (and recommend) 2ed, mostly because it allows the DM to follow "printed material" without the risk of interpretation... i guess it might be somewhat "orthodox" .


How do jarls affect the running of Rjurik domains?
I recommend treating Jarls as small holding rullers (King Rules the province, jarl handles local law/guild, much like a trader would have guilds in Anuirean realms). In a PBEM best is to have them NPC, and give them little involvement; perhaps similar to Anuirean "counts" that count no more than for roleplaying or to "occupy" an aspect of political life.


How have others run cross-cultural regions before?
I usually run Rjurik-centered campaigns, but I use the threat of an "anuirean invasion" from Boeruine or Avanil, (or potential new trade routes with the same realms) as "random events" -- there is nothing as scary to a PC as a letter from Boeruine saying they are looking for an ally to reconquer the area to create a domain for a "bastard", or a loyal henchman!

There is also the all-useful Rjuvik; as a former piracy-friendly realm it helps build "fronts" -- as do anti-Bloodskull-Thurazor alliances

Cheers and good luck with the PBEM - I'm still not ready to relaunch mine...

[AndrewTall]

The Anuirean invasion, of course, being provoked by the peace treaty between Rjurik realms that forces Rjuvik to raid south until Talinie begs Boeruine for aid...

I'd consider sticking an island of the west coast to make another realm, or making a small 1-2 province realm surrounded by Thurazor and happy to trade north. Even if these realms were small they'd expand the number of players / main npc's.

Jarls could vary from the regent's best lieutenants and generals, to his enemies actively seeking to take the throne. Ideally you'd have a balance between giving them enough power and respect to keep them sweet, and letting them get too much and seeing them get drunk on it (Stjordvik anyone?)

In RW the White Witch was not known as an awnie by everyone, instead the white Queeen of Gandvick, though known to follow Kreisha (lady of winter to eri's lord of summer, two parts of the same cycle, etc, etc) and somewhat feared was not automatically an enemy. This of course let her be far more active that would otherwise be the case - Hogunmark even wound up looking like the aggressor in the war between them! We should have explained it better to new players but it still made the WW playable.

The Siren similarly could either be thought of as a cursed scion, or as an ehrshegh rather than as an awnie - she's cute enough to pull off either. Otherwsie you are asking for Halskapa to march south and 'reclaim its ancient' provinces (ancient as in pre-empire!)

The Barony is somewhat stuck, if you give it guild (slavers, loggers, miners, etc) then it has a bit more income, but basically it is at war with <everyone> - and will probably be crushed early as a result - think now about your rules on genocide...

The Giantdowns would be a challenge as a player, either for the Watch or Ghuralli, but a few extra province levels could make all the difference.

The elves are harder if you spread north at all, Llua is just plain invincible. Warding cast by a L18 wizard? No mortal can pass the mists and the elves could strike without warning at any time...

I'd split it into traditional Llua and a smaller realm of young elves who want to try reaching out and forming alliances, the older elves know that it won't work, but don't mind 'the kids' playing for a decade or two if they grow out of it - learning by your own mistakes is afterall the best way to learn. Put the small realm in the south and it can ally with the dwarves of the northern downs, maybe the watch...

Oh, and if you are planning to include Dhoesone, I've posted quite a lot on the wiki about it... I'd be interested in any comments.

[rjurikwinds]

Yeah, I don't know if there was a poll done at one point, but I'm positive that after Anuire, the Rjurik Highlands would be the second most popular area...

I do like your idea of moving play into the Firth; I'm re-looking into the geographics of things; Would you go down south as far as Cariele? and west as far as Boeruine?

[Exile]

One major thing to watch out for with the jarls is the impact on the central king's income and troop-raising potential if the base rules are interpreted harshly: all those law holdings out of his hands can wreak merry havoc with his ability to tax, and can leave him with almost no ability to raise troops. By default, loyalty losses are enhanced if the taxing regent has no law at all in the province, and many of the Rjurik rulers only have a couple of law holdings to their name....

In Rjurik Winds, NPC subordinate rulers were willing (and able) to use their law holdings to let their superiors raise taxes without sparking rebellions everywhere. This removed most of the temptation to divest them, and avoided some realms going near-instantly bankrupt.

[kgauck]

If the Jarls refuse to contribute to tax collection they have a suicide wish. Its a rough world and jarls don't have the resources to defend themselves. It would be an usual situation that would lead a jarl to refuse this kind of cooperation. And it amounts to a breech of feudal duty, so they are liable to be ousted for doing so. Rebellion or near rebellion would be the only case this would be done.

[InVinoVeritas]

Yeah, I don't know if there was a poll done at one point, but I'm positive that after Anuire, the Rjurik Highlands would be the second most popular area...

I do like your idea of moving play into the Firth; I'm re-looking into the geographics of things; Would you go down south as far as Cariele? and west as far as Boeruine?

I figured I'd stop it at Talinie. Boeruine, the Five Peaks, Mhoried, Markazor, the Gorgon's Crown, the Giantdowns, the Realm of the White Witch, the Blood Skull Barony, and the Hjarring River make for very natural boundaries to the area, after which different interests take over.

The playing area becomes the Siren's Realm, Halskapa, Svinik, Rjuvik, Stjordvik, Dhoesone, Cariele, Thurazor, Talinie, and possibly Tuarhievel. The big power in the area becomes the Oaken Grove of Erik. Storm Holtson and Banner Andien get access to their entire guilds. Sea travel dominates, in one of the few major bodies of water without an awnshegh.

Now, just to get the players...

[Exile]

If the Jarls refuse to contribute to tax collection they have a suicide wish. Its a rough world and jarls don't have the resources to defend themselves. It would be an usual situation that would lead a jarl to refuse this kind of cooperation. And it amounts to a breech of feudal duty, so they are liable to be ousted for doing so. Rebellion or near rebellion would be the only case this would be done.

Not the point I'm making - by default in the rules, if the province ruler doesn't personally control the law holdings, raising taxes of any kind is a seriously risky proposition. Off the top of my head, controlling "less than half" the available law means that you can't ignore any Loyalty losses at all and that Severe tax causes a double level loss, while Moderate taxation causes the loss of one Level. I have the feeling that there's a reference somewhere to things getting even worse if you have _no_ Law at all in the province, but I wouldn't want to swear to that.

Unless the DM confirms a home rule that vassals can use their law holdings to count as if they were the province-ruler's own in this regard, income for the realms with jarls (or, from personal experience, for Khurin-Azur, with its single ruler-owned Law holding) is likely to be pitiful. And it's worth sorting that out in advance - and also confirming quite what the situation is for those law-holding-only vassals who are said to provide military units while lacking any visible source of GB income.

[Exile]

The playing area becomes the Siren's Realm, Halskapa, Svinik, Rjuvik, Stjordvik, Dhoesone, Cariele, Thurazor, Talinie, and possibly Tuarhievel. The big power in the area becomes the Oaken Grove of Erik. Storm Holtson and Banner Andien get access to their entire guilds. Sea travel dominates, in one of the few major bodies of water without an awnshegh.

Oooh. That does sound like an interesting area you've delineated, and the emphasis on the sea should make for some unusual dynamics in play. :)

I'd advocate including Tuarhievel, if only as an active NPC realm - it's got major ties to Dhoesone, and would provide an interesting counterpoint to the organised humanoids in Thurazor, the Giantdowns, and the Blood Skull Barony (the latter pair presumably actively involved in the playing area as raiders). Goblins and elves have interesting interactions of their own, and if there's just one non-human domain in a game it can easily become very isolated.

[Sorontar]

While I don't regard it as a canon example, but the Dragon article for the Yikarian Empire that I am working on in the wiki has 8 provinces, 7 of which are controlled by the Seven Sages. It is expected that they all are vassals to the Lotus Emperor and will surrender one fifth of their income to him.

"Failure to do so
results in the harsh punishments,
including deaths by impalement,
quartering, and pressing for minor
infractions, and the razing of entire
towns for major offenses. The Emperor
is not a lenient ruler."

Mind you, in this kingdom I have read it that their "god" (an awnshegh like the Serpent) is actually the leader of the realm. Even the Emperor is only a provincial leader with vassals.

Sorontar.

[kgauck]

Not the point I'm making - by default in the rules...

Rules without context are like a trigger happy blind man with a gun. I don't read rules to figure out what may or may not happen. Rules are merely means to assess the impact of actions. Context tells us what may or may not happen. The owner of the land and the owner of the law have a relationship. Depending on that relationship, you apply the rules to figure out how to arrive at a reasonable quantification of the result that makes the most sense based on the context. The rules serve to make the context playable as a game. If they can do that, great. If they can't, they context - the reality in-game - requires the rules be interpreted, extended, extrapolated, or house-ruled to serve the context.


(re: Yikarian Empire) 7 of (8 provinces) which are controlled by the Seven Sages. It is expected that they all are vassals to the Lotus Emperor and will surrender one fifth of their income to him.

20% is typical historically. It seems more consistent than the taxes that peasants pay to the lords, which varies between 8% and 12%.

[rjurikwinds]

Unless the DM confirms a home rule that vassals can use their law holdings to count as if they were the province-ruler's own in this regard, income for the realms with jarls (or, from personal experience, for Khurin-Azur, with its single ruler-owned Law holding) is likely to be pitiful. And it's worth sorting that out in advance - and also confirming quite what the situation is for those law-holding-only vassals who are said to provide military units while lacking any visible source of GB income.
Hold on... I didn't know that was a "house rule" -- I assumed that "vassals counting as support for liege" was standard core rules -- I ran through the basic chapters of the printed material and of course found nothing, but I thought I had read this somewhere...
Can others confirm?
This does mean that realms like Halskapa are really powerless kingdoms! As are much of the highlands!


Rules without context are like a trigger happy blind man with a gun. I don't read rules to figure out what may or may not happen. Rules are merely means to assess the impact of actions. Context tells us what may or may not happen. The owner of the land and the owner of the law have a relationship. Depending on that relationship, you apply the rules to figure out how to arrive at a reasonable quantification of the result that makes the most sense based on the context. The rules serve to make the context playable as a game. If they can do that, great. If they can't, they context - the reality in-game - requires the rules be interpreted, extended, extrapolated, or house-ruled to serve the context.

I know, I know, you are correct that we need to be smart and interpolate from the setting to explain and mold it into a playable situation... But I try to stick to the book, even if the rule seems unfair -- I guess we could go into the alignment metaphor (Lawful Neutral), I'll just admit to being a weak DM, and that often I need the rules in order to push back my player's urges (demands). I haven't played BR tabletop in years; but even back then, my players had spreadsheets and were trying to figure how best to "grow" -- and no doubt those "law holdings that don't do any good" would have been the first to go...
And maybe that might be the way Halskapa was intended to be played; Rid the Jarls one by one, and consolidate the "weak central state"... Same for Svinik, Rjuvik, Khurin Azur etc...

The question InVinoVeritas asked initially about the "role of jarls" becomes central then for those realms; and in the case of a PBEM I'd recommend the "house rule" of having vassal's law count as supporting the liege.

[kgauck]

often I need the rules in order to push back my player's urges (demands).

Here is a by the book solution:
The relations between any regent and any vassal is either, hostile, unfriendly, indifferent, friendly, or helpful.

If the vassal is unfriendly, they make law claims against your taxation, but otherwise support the taxes.

If the vassal is hostile, they refuse to support the taxation. This is an act of rebellion.

Everyone else supports taxation without issue.

Diplomacy actions are required to improve relations with vassals.

Its clear, it uses a defined mechanic that is a normal part of the rules. Consequences are predictable.

Normal vassals should be indifferent. If the color material suggests friendly makes more sense, then so be it. Only where characters are specifically mentioned otherwise should vassals be unfriendly or helpful. Hostile should only be an at-start situation in places like Rohrmarch or Osoerde, where rebellion is open.

[AndrewTall]

The various books can be read as a 'snapshot' or as 'typical' - powerful jarls are found in almost every Rjurik realm, the 'king' tends to have at most half the law, if that.

The Rjurik are however written of as a very community oriented people where everyone 'pulls together'. So I'd expect that jarls automatically support the ruler and the law holdings stack as Ken notes. The few jarls that are indifferent/hostile such as those mentioned in Stjordvik and possibly Halskapa do not offer support, but pretty much everyone else does - even jarls that don't particularly like the king will generally recognise the need for a strong army - and that failing to support taxation will likely lead to them being replaced as jarl...

So with Halskapa for example, I'd expect that if Bervinnig dies, the 'winning' jarl will be supported by their advocates, negotiate at least minimal support from most of the other jarls (I see that taxes are paid, you leave me alone otherwise), and maybe have 1 or at most 2 dissidents who refuse their rule - but to simply absorb the rebellious jarls holdings into the kings would likely cause more problems than it solved, the Rjurik expect local jarls to have significant influence, and don't want to become an Anuirean realm dancing at the whim of a 'would-be emperor'. A PC might get away with it if Halskapa had a civil war which resulted in the need for 'a single strong ruler' but otherwise they'd have to stick loyal placemen in the seats of the former jarls to rule effectively.

[rjurikwinds]

Here is a by the book solution:
The relations between any regent and any vassal is either, hostile, unfriendly, indifferent, friendly, or helpful.

If the vassal is unfriendly, they make law claims against your taxation, but otherwise support the taxes.

If the vassal is hostile, they refuse to support the taxation. This is an act of rebellion.

Everyone else supports taxation without issue.

Diplomacy actions are required to improve relations with vassals.

Its clear, it uses a defined mechanic that is a normal part of the rules. Consequences are predictable.

Normal vassals should be indifferent. If the color material suggests friendly makes more sense, then so be it. Only where characters are specifically mentioned otherwise should vassals be unfriendly or helpful. Hostile should only be an at-start situation in places like Rohrmarch or Osoerde, where rebellion is open.

Ok, yeah, so that makes total sense; I see the case (like Osoerde) that would represent the hostile vassal -- and yeah that would be total war...

So back to InVinoVerita's game, and AndrewTall's example of Halskapa; the Halskapan "succession" might be something that other rulers might be tempted to meddle with... Support a vassal and have it turn hostile to the new King (So diplomacy actions on jarls, to win them over?)

[kgauck]

So back to InVinoVerita's game, and AndrewTall's example of Halskapa; the Halskapan "succession" might be something that other rulers might be tempted to meddle with... Support a vassal and have it turn hostile to the new King (So diplomacy actions on jarls, to win them over?)

Why would anyone want this? It makes no sense. They only kind of power that would operate this way is one that is already denied possibility of friendship.

I can see supporting a Jarl in hopes that he becomes King of Halskapa, with a friendly Jarl as a consolation prize.

I can see supporting a Jarl in hopes of having a friend at court in Halskapa.

Supporting a Jarl with the hopes of turning them hostile to the new king is something you have to keep secret from everyone. If the Jarl finds out, he'll resent being used, and will cease to be a friend. If the new king finds out you have a serious rival. Three people can keep a secret when two of them are dead. Your hope is that you do some damage (why?) before your secret is exposed.

I can see the Siren doing this to prevent a new king from trying to deal with those lost provinces. But, only if the Siren can't expect civil relations with the new king. Because once she does this, civil relations are basically off the table, and she and he are rivals, likely to make Halskapan aggression more likely. So unless the new king already had dialed hostility so high that the Siren thinks this kind of aggression is better than laying low, this is a bad call for the Siren.

I can see the White Witch doing this, especially a White Witch bent on undermining Rjurik kingdoms with espionage based on infiltration, subversion, and disinformation. But I also see the White Witch as the Big Bad of the Highlands use tactics are like those of the Comintern with committed agents, fellow travelers, and useful idiots peppered throughout the Highlands. If the White Witch was not bent on subversion, but wanted to be, or could be accepted as a normal realm, this makes less sense.

Rjuvik does this with regard to Guthrim Gauksson, but Rjuvik is a pariah realm unable to win the legitimate recognition of its peers. If its relations could be normalized, this kind of approach would be counter-productive.

For the most part the Highlands lacks a zero-sum dynamic like the Iron Throne to make interstate competition necessary.

[InVinoVeritas]

For the most part the Highlands lacks a zero-sum dynamic like the Iron Throne to make interstate competition necessary.

This is probably the greatest impediment to a Rjurik campaign as written; although the land and its people are compelling and interesting, they lack the dynamic of everyone trying to reach for a goal--or indeed, trying to coordinate to solve a crisis--outside of outright ambition. And political ambition is frowned upon in traditional Rjurik society.

However, I think that Bervinig of Halskapa is the solution to this. At the beginning of the campaign, Bervinig dies, but in his senility, he completely muddles the choosing of an heir, and all the Province holdings of Halskapa become uncontrolled. Now, every jarl, every Rjurik king, every ambitious traveler has a good reason to stake a claim in Halskapa, while remaining true to Rjurik ideals. If a realm like Rjuvik overstretches itself in the attempt to claim Halskapa, then they become potential takeover targets as well. Finally, it is a good idea to take over anywhere that has grown weak, because otherwise it will fall to the White Witch or the Blood Skull Barony. That might get the instability going.

Instead of a political struggle of a zero-sum game, the Taelshore becomes the land of a political gold rush.

[kgauck]

This is probably the greatest impediment to a Rjurik campaign as written; although the land and its people are compelling and interesting, they lack the dynamic of everyone trying to reach for a goal--or indeed, trying to coordinate to solve a crisis--outside of outright ambition. And political ambition is frowned upon in traditional Rjurik society.

Other than the White Witch, the Siren, and the Blood Skull Barony, I might agree with you, but the internal tensions of every realm, Jarls and Kings, Settled and Nomadic, and the normal political factions, combined with the constant problems caused by the White Witch and Blood Skull Barony make the Highlands a very interesting location. Throw in a bad-boy realm like Rjuvik, some personal feuds, and a few quest items to go hunting for and you have a region as interesting as any you will find anywhere.

The dynamic of everyone reaching for the same goal or responding to the same crisis is frankly boring. A diversity of challenges and situations makes for much richer potential of interesting situations.

[Sorontar]

Indeed, I have found that even Birthright adventure campaigns should not assume that everyone wants to revive the Anuirean Empire. Not everyone is Anuirean after all and some cultures regret ever being part of the empire.

For this reason, my Rjurik character wanted to destroy the sword of Roele not save it. He was against the symbolism that it held.

The Rjurik Highlands also have the "traditional vs progressive" issue that is evident in the differences between the Oaken Grove and the Emerald Spiral. A similar issue has been applied to the Vos (nona vs torva). These are not nationalistic issues. These are more philosophical than that. I can see it having major affect on expansion plans, trade routes and the use of resources, etc.

Sorontar

[InVinoVeritas]

Other than the White Witch, the Siren, and the Blood Skull Barony, I might agree with you, but the internal tensions of every realm, Jarls and Kings, Settled and Nomadic, and the normal political factions, combined with the constant problems caused by the White Witch and Blood Skull Barony make the Highlands a very interesting location. Throw in a bad-boy realm like Rjuvik, some personal feuds, and a few quest items to go hunting for and you have a region as interesting as any you will find anywhere.

The dynamic of everyone reaching for the same goal or responding to the same crisis is frankly boring. A diversity of challenges and situations makes for much richer potential of interesting situations.

Overall, I agree, but I guess I am blinded by the types of games I've played in Birthright.

For an adventure-based campaign, I agree, a diversity of plot hooks makes for a very interesting setting, and the Rjurik Highlands has that aplenty. However, I have played far more the regent-based campaign, with the individual PCs playing characters that do not adventure together naturally. As a result, more effort must be placed in understanding the opportunities for the PCs to collaborate or compete, and in this case, a diversity of plot hooks does not help; each PC is free to run after his or her own problem.

However, I concede that that is probably based on my experience of Birthright campaigns. I don't think I've played in an adventure-based Birthright campaign for ten years... not that I haven't wanted to...

[kgauck]

I think most regents game have no clear victory conditions, they are entirely open ended. In Anuire, goals like the Iron Crown, and threats like the Gorgon provide clear indications of victory and defeat.

In any game, whether in the Highlands, Anuire, or anywhere else, I think individual domains should have individual victory conditions. Halskapa, for instance, has lost provinces. Getting them back should be a major victory.

In the Highlands, feuding should be a regular and persistent random event. The long term effect of feuding can be to reduce the law holdings loyal to the crown. However, the crown is normally forbidden by custom from intervening in feuds. Intervention can reduce the loyalty of Jarls and provinces. Feuds can also escalate when the contending families do not share a common overlord.

[AndrewTall]

In Ruins of Empire Bjorn gave every domain goals, some major some minor. Some of these goals require co-operation between regents, some encourage opposition - add in joint pasts (regents may have fostered together, fought besides each other, etc) and story aims (regent A wants their daughter to marry regent B's son) and adventures should be able to drag in several domains - particularly if each player plays several characters in the domain to permit dissension between the goals of a character and their domain.

[rjurikwinds]

In any game, whether in the Highlands, Anuire, or anywhere else, I think individual domains should have individual victory conditions. Halskapa, for instance, has lost provinces. Getting them back should be a major victory.
Totally agree; same with Hogunmark: they lost several provinces to the white witch... and any good Rjuven would become legendary if he was able to defeat the Blood Skulls or the White Witch.

In my Rjuven games I often bring the Gorgon in as well; Mostly because people are use to Anuire and that beast's threat is... well scary. On top of that the Giantdowns is a good place for a fight; desolate, scarcely populated, and the Gorgon's crown just across the Ruide river... So have the Gorgon skip through the Downs, and takeover the Blood skull, and you have one worried bunch of Rjuven kings...

[kgauck]

The Giantdowns is a good place for a fight; desolate, scarcely populated...

The scarcely populated part makes the Giantdowns impassable for armies. How many units can subsist on the produce of the province depends on how many people you think are in a province.

Normally a province consumes 90% of its produce so only 10% is even available for armies. Armies that consume more mean population declines. Most action takes place before the harvest, so living off the land requires both hardship for the local population and keeping the total number of units below 1:40 of the local productive population.

Some provinces, say those who produce mining, import food, so have an even lower ratio of food to native population.

[AndrewTall]

I disagree with Ken on the Giantdowns, but mainly b/c I work on the assumption that it is too humanist in approach - I'd see no problem with having reasonable levels of goblins and giants around who could be conquered and then support an army making the giantdowns a new Markazor. As a more desolate land, the Giantdowns is a snack en route to the Barony that can be forgotten about one local supplies are sourced from conquered lands - or the baronies population could support the Gorgon's troops as they munch their way along the Taelshore.

The downside with the Gorgon invasion is that it eliminates competition between PC regents - at least the sane ones. With the Gorgon in play the king who seeks to 'reclaim lost provinces' or suchlike isn't just threatening one rjurik realm, they are threatening the rjurik as a whole - its stand together or fall apart. Similarly such a scenario threatens the barony hugely, the moment the Gorgon starts conquering the downs, the Barony is an obvious ally and supporter - so the Barony goes from nuisance to threat for every single neighbour - and the barony is likely to be annihilated.

If you want a big bad in play, you could have one of the Gorgon's general's invade - if they win then they are rewarded by the Gorgon with a dukedom over much of the land, if they lose then he's lost no face - rumours of similar attacks on the Anuireans and Khinasi or Brecht lend a sense of urgency - which nation will prove the soft touch for conquest that will be the focus of the Gorgon's hunger?

A less obvious big bad is Ghuralli, if he took the Barony and Downs he gets quite a handy power base - a short lived agreement to split Stjordvik with Rjuvik could make him a major threat.

Otherwise a resurgent giant kingdom, Anuirean invasion, new awnshegh (possibly a puppet of the white queen), an underground tunnel between the barony and Urga-Zai allowing them to join forces, etc could all lead to a big battle game. The spoilsport will usually be Lluabraight which can beat any foe barring the Gorgon, my worry with them is usually trying to figure out how Ghuralli and the Witch supposedly stole elven land...

[kgauck]

I disagree with Ken on the Giantdowns, but mainly b/c I work on the assumption that it is too humanist in approach

I don't disagree with anything you said, because I was intentionally only talking about humans. Presumably players are playing humans. Secondly, I can't speak to the supply needs of fantasic armies. That kind of thing is, by neccesity, something of a DM handwave. Either a fantastic army can or can't cross it. But since I was specifically addressing humans, because players control that, rather than monsters, which DM's control, I really don't see any disagreement.

If you look at a lot of the Highlands, especially outside the Taleshore, it gets very army unfriendly. But it is something of a trope, is it not, that where conditions are too hard for humans, some monsters dwell? Some monsters may be social and prone to organization by dark oowers, &c, &c.

[rjurikwinds]

I don't disagree with anything you said, because I was intentionally only talking about humans. Presumably players are playing humans. Secondly, I can't speak to the supply needs of fantasic armies.
True; I keep playing with unrealistic assumption that your unit maintenance payments (and movement costs) bundle-in the supply-route issue, even for human armies...

But I guess the problem is less likely to be a problem for an environment like the Tael-firth -- since you have the sea! It makes for an easy explanation of how armies get supplied whyle away (by the sea).

I'm wondering what InVinoVeritas will do about sea battle rules; one of the issues I've had during the Rjurik Winds campaign was the idea that some players wanted to "blockade" a province from the sea (cut sea-based traderoutes, prevent units from passing-through without a fight) -- I guess similar to wanting to cut-off supply routes for land-based armies (again, which I tended to ignore anyway).
Allowing a regent to "occupy" a sea-province sounds realistic enough, but then people talk about running the blockades (without a fight) and DC checks to pass through...

[kgauck]

True; I keep playing with unrealistic assumption that your unit maintenance payments (and movement costs) bundle-in the supply-route issue, even for human armies...

Supply routes are certainly not medieval. Medieval armies are more supply-as-you-go, which is one of the reasons castles are so important. They collect taxes in the form of food and some coin, which make them great for armies.


But I guess the problem is less likely to be a problem for an environment like the Tael-firth -- since you have the sea! It makes for an easy explanation of how armies get supplied whyle away (by the sea).

That's true, but what I was thinking of is that the Taelshore is where all the people are and hence where all the food is grown.


I'm wondering what InVinoVeritas will do about sea battle rules; one of the issues I've had during the Rjurik Winds campaign was the idea that some players wanted to "blockade" a province from the sea (cut sea-based traderoutes, prevent units from passing-through without a fight) -- I guess similar to wanting to cut-off supply routes for land-based armies (again, which I tended to ignore anyway).
Allowing a regent to "occupy" a sea-province sounds realistic enough, but then people talk about running the blockades (without a fight) and DC checks to pass through...

Blockades are not really practical until much later. Proper blockades are after the Anglo-Dutch wars of the mid 17th century. Earlier blockades, especially with oar driven ships, even with sails, you aren't able to put a longship "on-station" in a blockade for any period of time at all. It has a very small cargo area. The kind of blockades that are possible require a nearby base. And nearby means you can see the object of your blockade and can push off when you see boats entering or leaving whatever you are blockading. That means being able to control either an island (by far the favorite) or a piece of coastline.

If you are besieging a city, keeping boats ready to sortie is easy enough. If you want to blockade a city without a siege, you need a nearby base.

[AndrewTall]

Humans vs non-humans is an issue which fascinates me, the ecological impact of elves, goblins and dwarves based on their cultures implies very different land usage to the humans. That said they are all 'player' races so should follow similar mechanics in output terms.

If the downs are truly monstrous, then even goblins will be scattered and the issue for the Gorgon would be supply lines and speed of passage - a massed army is likely to be avoided by monsters (though pity the scouts and foragers) but still needs food and water, the latter can likely be sourced locally as it should be quite wet, but even so carrying more than 3 days of food is pretty tough, the Downs are rough terrain and much of the army will be on foot, assuming 1 province per day it will take a week minimum to cross, after which the army has to go over some very nasty looking mountains. In that sort of scenario the Gorgon might happily send discrete aid to the Watch, so that it can break the land and build a realm that can be used as a staging post, as otherwise any army that tried to cross would be exhausted when it had done so and far from combat ready.

[kgauck]

assuming 1 province per day it will take a week minimum to cross.

A province per day is very fast. Medieval armies were normally happy with 10-12 miles per day. Of course that was under typical conditions. Optimal conditions would be better, and of course we can imagine conditions that would slow an army. These are plentiful in the Giantdowns. But we can point to generalizations which effect advance rates.

Small forces advance faster than large forces. This is in part a function of friction, but it can be pronounced by bottlenecks to movement because of passes, fords, and bridges.

Advance rates decline as the duration of the march increases. Rushing from one province to another to get there because a major battle is expected might see men hurry 30 miles in a single day, but as travel distance, travel averages will slow towards expected averages.

An all out effort can increase the rate of advance (as in the example above) but the costs of exhaustion mean casualties.

Advance rates are reduced by difficult terrain. The Giantdowns is poor, but not the worst terrain possible.

A particular example of this is rivers, because their effect on movement is profound. Especially when in hostile country. Rivers cause bottlenecks under the best circumstances, when in hostile country, even when the enemy can't engage your main body, they make everything take longer and cost more.

Advance rates are correlated to quality and density of roads. The Giantdowns will be poor in this regard.

Advance is hampered by bad weather. Mists, fog, rain, and worse can slow the movement of troops.

Advance rates are reduced by poor supply. Mostly because the army spends time foraging.

Advance rates reflect interactions with friendly and enemy operations. Under ideal conditions there are neither. This amounts to strategic movement. Friendly operations would be scouting and foraging, or attacking, storming, and so on. Anything other than moving.

I would expect something around six miles per day as the crow flies. Assuming they avoid some of the rougher terrain and until they get to the Silverhead Mountains.

[AndrewTall]

I was figuring a best case - 20 miles would be hard even assuming minimal supplies, as you note it would probably take a lot longer for a laden army. But then that merely makes it harder for both sides - one can hardly wait for a road and strong of forts to be built across the downs to enable the Gorgon readier access to the highlands...

Either way a mass invasion is likely to derail most side-plots so I'd probably avoid it.

[kgauck]

http://www.birthright.net/brwiki/images/8/8c/Taelshore_Logistics.jpg

Here's a map showing, based only on local production, the logistical capacity of the Taelshore. One can instantly see certain implications. Of little surprise, there is the coastal zone, but the implications are that there is a narrow zone of possible warfare on a large scale. This means its easy to defend on land, and very difficult to defend by sea.

In a sense this means that the style of war that will be very common would be very like a Viking way of war, where armies get on boats, raid an enemy unexpectedly, and either move on, or press their advantage in a joint land and sea campaign.

What of flanking operations? Possible for daring commanders but risky, because first you have to cross empty terrain where food, but especially crafted supplies, would be absent, but if things go poorly, your retreat is back into this desert. Historically, this is a high risk, high reward strategy, because when it works, the surprise proves to be the margin of difference, but when it fails, it proves to be catastrophic.

Some of these areas are simply poorly populated, such the east of Halskapa. Here light raiders could operate normally, or support major operations to the west. Svinik and Rjuvik are divided by wetland however, and this is a much less forgiving.

Svinik's swamp is smaller, though the empty provinces are still quite empty. But a route of castles and fortifications would very probabaly link Innsmark to Leivika and Bjarnheim. Large armies could move between them resupplying from well provisioned castles on the way.

Rjuvik has a separate center at Viborg from which the north is controlled.

Also interesting is the northern band from Innsmark, Jurva, and Gundviir, which is very probabaly a cockpit of warfare, well defended, well armed, and organized for sieges rather than long distance raids. This zone is probabaly most like the high middle ages in warfare.