PDA

View Full Version : Realms: scores



Sir Tiamat
07-03-2009, 10:04 AM
Here's a first draft that will hopefully demonstrate how I intend to reform ruling a domain. From the simple premise that realms are similar to characters, I strive to design a streamlined system as an aid to roleplaying.

Though I think birthright is one of the best settings designed, it's mechanics are a bit rusty. For me mechanics are not the core of a setting, they must only work and support the setting. As such, I am willing to radically change the mechanics of the setting, while retaining its feel. I also understand - being on a forum dedicated to an AD&D setting - that to some my views may seem like that of a radical heretic. ;)

Sir Tiamat
07-03-2009, 10:06 AM
After you choose your regent-type, determine your Domain ability scores. Six abilities provide a quick description of your domain's characteristics. Does it rely on a loyal and large base of followers? On an all-seeing, and ruthlessly efficient bureaucracy? Is it creative and resourceful? Your ability scores define these qualities—your domain’s strengths as well as its weaknesses.


Force (For) measures your domain's manpower, its militia and labor force.
✦ Many holding attacks are based on Force.
✦ Warlords and Cardinals have powers based on Force.
✦ Your Force might contribute to your Resilience defense.
✦ Force is the key ability for Labor, Muster and Rally skill checks.


Organization (Org) represents your realm’s structure, reorganization, stamina, and vital force. All domains benefit from a high Organization score.
✦ Your Organization score is added to your [realm/holding] hit points.
✦ The number of reorganization efforts you can use each day is influenced by your Organization.
✦ Many […] powers are based on Organization.
✦ Your Organization might contribute to your Resilience defense.
✦ Organization is the key ability for [perseverance] skill checks.


Responsiveness (Res) measures self-reliance, adaptation, creativity, and the reaction time of your domain's holdings.
✦ Many Distant attacks are based on Responsiveness.
✦ Many Guilder powers are based on Responsiveness.
✦ Your Responsiveness might contribute to your Security defense.
✦If your realm relies on concealment, your Responsiveness might contribute to your Fortification Level.
✦ Responsiveness is the key ability for Commerce, Design, Exploration, Seafaring, and Stealth skill checks.


Intelligence (Int) describes how well your domain learns secrets, is aware of forces in surrounding lands and society, and discovers rival plans.
✦ [Archmage/ Mage] powers are based on Intelligence.
✦ Your Intelligence might contribute to your Security defense.
✦ If your realm relies on concealment, your Intelligence might contribute to your Fortification Level.
✦ Intelligence is the key ability for Research, Source Lore, Information Gathering, and Espionage skill checks.


Bureaucracy (Bur) measures the coordination, planning, and efficiency of your domain.
✦ Many Warlord and Cardinal powers are based on Bureaucracy.
✦ Your Bureaucracy might contribute to your Loyalty defense.
✦ Bureaucracy is the key ability for Administrate, Ritual, and Diplomacy skill checks.

Devotion (Dev) measures your domain’s popularity, your subject’s loyalty, your persuasiveness, and your leadership.
✦ Many Cardinal powers are based on Devotion.
✦ Your Devotion might contribute to your Loyalty defense.
✦ Devotion is the key ability for Ceremony, and Lead skill checks.


Each of your ability scores is a number that measures the power of that ability. A domain with a 16
Force is much stronger than a doamin with a 6 Force. A score of 10 or 11 is the normal realm average, but player realms are a cut above average in most abilities. As you advance in levels, your ability scores keep getting better. Your ability score determines an ability modifier that you add to any attack, check, roll, or defense based on that ability. For instance, making a basic holding attack with a lawholding is a Force attack, so you add the ability modifier for your Force score to your attack rolls and damage rolls. If your score is 17, your realm is pretty forcefull; you add +3 to attack rolls and damage rolls when you make that attack.

Your ability scores also influence your defenses, since you add your ability modifier to your defense score.
✦ For Resilience defense, you add the higher of your Force or Organization ability modifiers.
✦ For Security defense, you add the higher of your Responsiveness or Intelligence ability modifiers.
✦ For Loyalty defense, you add the higher of your Bureaucracy or Devotion ability modifiers.

Sir Tiamat
07-03-2009, 10:14 AM
Skill Key Ability

1. Labor Force
2. Power display/ rally Force
3. Muster Force
4. Endure hardship Organization
5. Commerce Responsiveness
6. Expedition/ Exploration Responsiveness
7. Seafaring Responsiveness
8. Design Responsiveness
9. Stealth Responsiveness
10. Research Intelligence
11. Source Lore Intelligence
12. Information Gathering Intelligence
13. Espionage Intelligence
14. Ritual Bureaucracy
15. Administrate Bureaucracy
16. Planning (admin) Bureaucracy
17. Execute (admin) Bureaucracy
18. Diplomacy Bureaucracy
19. Finance Bureaucracy
20. Ceremony Devotion
21. Lead Devotion


Domain skills can be used in skill challenges for any action the ruler would like to create that is not an attack.

tpdarkdraco
07-03-2009, 10:28 AM
Hey Sir Tiamat,

It is great to see someone else hard at work. I haven't even looked at a 4e conversion for the domain side of things.

I find your ideas very intriguing and I like the idea of a realm character sheet. Very keen to see more explainations and expanded ideas.

rjurikwinds
07-04-2009, 04:42 AM
Yes; I'm rather intreagued too, and I like idea of realm/province "abilities".

I'd naturally ask;
Do each of these abilities material into physical or natural characteristic;
Forests for Force,
Roads for Organisation
Rivers for Responsiveness
Hills or mountains for Devotion
...

Or are these scores more abstract -- perhaps more descriptions of the makeup (sophistication) of the population?

Thelandrin
07-04-2009, 11:17 AM
I like this idea and I didn't even realise that I was in the 4th Ed forum until I started reading about the defences and their dual ability modifiers :D

Sir Tiamat
07-07-2009, 11:46 PM
Yes; I'm rather intreagued too, and I like idea of realm/province "abilities".

I'd naturally ask;
Do each of these abilities material into physical or natural characteristic;
Forests for Force,
Roads for Organisation
Rivers for Responsiveness
Hills or mountains for Devotion
...

Or are these scores more abstract -- perhaps more descriptions of the makeup (sophistication) of the population?

To clarify, these scores are indeed intended to be more abstract, representing the constitution of your government and followers and their collective strengths and weaknesses. Obviously, while these scores represent the attributes of a domain, these could be rooted in various underlying characteristics depending on the domain. For example, the force score of a law domain could represent militia, levies and serfs that could provide labor, that of a temple domain could represent the faithful, whereas the force score of a source domain could well represent summoned creatures and magical forces.

irdeggman
07-08-2009, 10:43 AM
I like this concept but you need to be careful or throw out one of the BR core elements.

Somehow the society "level" and source "level" need to be related and force a limitation on the relative ability scores for the province.

What I mean is that (except for elven lands) a high nature and high society can't co-exist.

The magic power of the land is tied to its nature rating while the physical (e.g., income, military, etc.) are tied to its "society" level.

Sir Tiamat
07-08-2009, 08:17 PM
I like this concept but you need to be careful or throw out one of the BR core elements.

Somehow the society "level" and source "level" need to be related and force a limitation on the relative ability scores for the province.

What I mean is that (except for elven lands) a high nature and high society can't co-exist.

The magic power of the land is tied to its nature rating while the physical (e.g., income, military, etc.) are tied to its "society" level.

Domain scores represent the attributes of the domain, that is the collective holding and province levels of a regent. It is therefore not related to the source or society level as such. A high rating could theoretically imply both.

irdeggman
07-09-2009, 10:17 AM
Realm scores represent the attributes of the realm, that is the collective holding and province levels of a regent. It is therefore not related to the source or society level as such. A high rating could theoretically imply both.

So it is totally independent on pppulation size and terrain?

So an attack is made against the same type of defense (since the attributes seem to work towards those) is likewise indendent?

Are they restricted to each each other - that is you determine them with a point buy type of interaction (like normal attributes)? So that you can't be "great" at every thing. Or can all of them be "high" or increased to be "high"?

Off hand to me it seems that there should be a limit to these attributes based on population or else a province with a low population can have the same attribute score as one with a high population.

Now if these are reworked to be a percentage that is multiplied by province level to determine an overall number used for such things that would factor in most things that are important, although making it very complicated.

Sir Tiamat
07-09-2009, 11:10 AM
So it is totally independent on pppulation size and terrain?

So an attack is made against the same type of defense (since the attributes seem to work towards those) is likewise indendent?

Are they restricted to each each other - that is you determine them with a point buy type of interaction (like normal attributes)? So that you can't be "great" at every thing. Or can all of them be "high" or increased to be "high"?

Off hand to me it seems that there should be a limit to these attributes based on population or else a province with a low population can have the same attribute score as one with a high population.

Now if these are reworked to be a percentage that is multiplied by province level to determine an overall number used for such things that would factor in most things that are important, although making it very complicated.

Let me start by making a few general remarks.

First, simplicity is part of my design philosophy and as such I have dismissed several of my ideas that would provide a better simulation but would become overly complicated.

Second, I want to make clear that domain ability scores do not refer to a single province, but to the entire domain - provinces may or may not be part of this domain depending on the ruler.

Last, I intend to use holdings as modifiers on the skill check.

I now envisage a point-buy system for the basic score, however they can later be modified - e.g. luitenants, feats, holdings. Moreover, I think that a bigger domain should probably have higher scores than a smaller domain. Therefore I am currently considering that these scores are modified by the total level of holdings - where a specific holding is tied to specific attributes. I do not yet know how many holdings should be required for a single point increase in a score and wheter this increase should be linear.

That brings us to the next point. Many skill checks are made at the domain level, meaning that you use all the resources available to you to complete a task. However, some would target a specific province and would require the use of your holdings in that particular province. In this case rather than modify the scores with the total level of holdings in youir domain, I would modify the sheck based on the relative number of holdings within that province.

For example, if you wish to rally your supporters to take to the streets within a certain province it would be represented by a rally skill check, modified with your relative lawholding level if you are proficient using law holdings. Say you are proficient and own more than half of the law in the province level you get a +2 to the check or something like that.

irdeggman
07-10-2009, 09:51 AM
Let's take a look at 2 of the realms in the ooks for comparison.

Roesone and Aerenwe.

It appears per your concepts that the 2 could have identical scores.

But are both equally capable of defensive against magic attacks? Against physical attacks? Are both equally capable of making physical attacks or magical attacks?

Aerenwe has vastly more magic potential then does the mostly farmed Roesone.

Roesone has vastly more income generation due to its more "developed" state.

These are the "caps" that I think you need to address, which is what I'm trying to point out.

If not, then one of the core principles of the original setting needs to be abandoned.

I would propose some sort of limit on "scores" based on population/development.

I also think you need to break this down to the province level instead of assuming the realm level - since many more actions are accomplished at the province level then are at the realm level.

Realm level aggregate attributes could be generated (the easiest way would be to do an average, but that might be too simple) - for realm level actions.

Vicente
07-10-2009, 11:26 AM
But are both equally capable of defensive against magic attacks? Against physical attacks? Are both equally capable of making physical attacks or magical attacks?

Aerenwe has vastly more magic potential then does the mostly farmed Roesone.

Roesone has vastly more income generation due to its more "developed" state.

These are the "caps" that I think you need to address, which is what I'm trying to point out.


I usually don't like caps in games: why not using the "development" score as a penalty for the "magic" score instead of using a cap? That way both scores use the same rules instead of having the weird 2e Birthright rule but the idea of a high development hurting magic continues to work.

Sir Tiamat
07-10-2009, 07:23 PM
Let's take a look at 2 of the realms in the ooks for comparison.

Roesone and Aerenwe.

It appears per your concepts that the 2 could have identical scores.

But are both equally capable of defensive against magic attacks? Against physical attacks? Are both equally capable of making physical attacks or magical attacks?

Aerenwe has vastly more magic potential then does the mostly farmed Roesone.

Roesone has vastly more income generation due to its more "developed" state.

These are the "caps" that I think you need to address, which is what I'm trying to point out.

If not, then one of the core principles of the original setting needs to be abandoned.

I would propose some sort of limit on "scores" based on population/development.

I also think you need to break this down to the province level instead of assuming the realm level - since many more actions are accomplished at the province level then are at the realm level.

Realm level aggregate attributes could be generated (the easiest way would be to do an average, but that might be too simple) - for realm level actions.


You make some good points, let me think how to address these. :)

In the meanwhile I can partly answer your remark to break the domain scores down to the province level. I think these scores cannot be assigned to every province because it would entail too much book keeping, especially in larger realms. To me, playability trumps realism in a game system. This could of course be a reason not to use this system. However, I see much potential for improvement in game play and consider it therefore too early to dismiss the proposed system on beforehand. I think these things could be adequately resolved.

Sir Tiamat
07-10-2009, 08:05 PM
I now will try to address your points, one by one.


Let's take a look at 2 of the realms in the ooks for comparison.

Roesone and Aerenwe.

It appears per your concepts that the 2 could have identical scores.

In theory, yes.

(we could of course have optional "racial modifiers" for realms, but then these two realms could still end up with similar scores)


But are both equally capable of defensive against magic attacks? Against physical attacks? Are both equally capable of making physical attacks or magical attacks?

If both have similar scores, they may also turn out to have equal defences against attacks, yes. As for attacks I will return to that shortly.


Aerenwe has vastly more magic potential then does the mostly farmed Roesone.

Roesone has vastly more income generation due to its more "developed" state.

Which will probably mean that these domains have dissimilar holdings. If they have a different configuration of holdings, then this will not only affect their scores, but also their skill checks, and attacks.

Aerenwe will only be better able to make magic attacks if it a) controls more and larger source holdings; b) is proficient with these holdings; and c) has powers based on these holdings. The same applies with Roesone and Law holdings.

Income, holding and source levels are all resources. How effectively these resources can be put to use depends on class, level, ability scores, feats and powers.


These are the "caps" that I think you need to address, which is what I'm trying to point out

If not, then one of the core principles of the original setting needs to be abandoned.

I would propose some sort of limit on "scores" based on population/development.


I hope to have adequately shown, that these caps are thus provided by holding levels, which are in turn capped by the population/develompments of provinces.

Sir Tiamat
07-10-2009, 08:14 PM
I usually don't like caps in games: why not using the "development" score as a penalty for the "magic" score instead of using a cap? That way both scores use the same rules instead of having the weird 2e Birthright rule but the idea of a high development hurting magic continues to work.

I not know exactly what you mean. Do you mean "score" as in the province score or as in the realm ability scores? Because the latter does not have a magic score as such, only a score that lets your realm be more effective using magic - and research, discovery of secrets etc.

irdeggman
07-13-2009, 09:20 PM
Which will probably mean that these realms have dissimilar holdings. If they have a different configuration of holdings, then this will not only affect their scores, but also their skill checks, and attacks.

Aerenwe will only be better able to make magic attacks if it a) controls more and larger source holdings; b) is proficient with these holdings; and c) has powers based on these holdings. The same applies with Roesone and Law holdings.



See this is probably where the apparent logic check is missing.

There doesn't seem to be a tie in between holding types and ability scores.

If holding types (and sizes) had a direct relationship to ability scores it might make it clearer.

As it is, it appears that both high sources levels and high law levels can contribute to force, organization and responsiveness scores.

It is also possible to say that intelligence is actually not tied to source levels or that intelligence is not balanced against force and devotion.

Vicente
07-13-2009, 10:05 PM
I not know exactly what you mean. Do you mean "score" as in the province score or as in the realm ability scores? Because the latter does not have a magic score as such, only a score that lets your realm be more effective using magic - and research, discovery of secrets etc.

You have a realm score that says how effective it is using magic, you could penalize all the rolls involving that score with the score that represents realm development (industry, population,...) if you want to keep the BR feeling of development and magic been opposed.

Sir Tiamat
07-14-2009, 12:17 AM
See this is probably where the apparent logic check is missing.

There doesn't seem to be a tie in between holding types and ability scores.

If holding types (and sizes) had a direct relationship to ability scores it might make it clearer.

As it is, it appears that both high sources levels and high law levels can contribute to force, organization and responsiveness scores.

Ah, now I see what you mean, it looks like I did not understand you before.

When I said that holdings might modify ability scores, I did not mean to imply that different holdings would modify the same score. I have not worked it all out yet, but I was thinking along the lines of letting law holdings modify Force, guild holdings modify responsiveness, source holdings intelligence and temple holdings bureaucracy.

You could also have each holding type provide a bonus to 2 scores or one and a half score. I have not figured this out yet. :)

However, different holdings should provide bonusses to different checks.

Sir Tiamat
07-14-2009, 12:33 AM
You have a realm score that says how effective it is using magic, you could penalize all the rolls involving that score with the score that represents realm development (industry, population,...) if you want to keep the BR feeling of development and magic been opposed.

I still do not understand, I hope by making my points clear, your points will also become clear to me. ;)

In the proposed system I asign one set of six ability scores to the entire domain - in other words the total collection of holding and source levels under one regent. These six "ability scores" help determine how well the domain can cary out specific skills, just like ability scores help determine your skills at the character level.

Holding and source holding levels are tools in the proposed system, they are used as weapons and to cary out tasks - in other words skills - at the province level. They work similar to thieves tools, that provide a + to a skill check or a sword +3 at the character level.

The system of province levels and source levels will not change in the proposed system; they will continue to set a limitation on the maximum number holding of source holding levels within a province.

Ah.. perhaps I was unclear because I did not use the proper term for source holding...
In my earlier posts where I said source levels I mean source holding levels, which can indeed be confusing. My appologies. :)

Sorontar
07-14-2009, 12:57 AM
Sir Tiamat, by realms you mean domains? Because it is possible to be in charge of a realm but have no holdings by purely being a provincial regent. The holdings within the realm may be vassals or independent from the provincial regent.

The word "domain" has been used by us mainly to imply that a domain regent has at least one holding of some sort under their control. Strictly speaking, a realm is a subset of domains.

Sorontar

Sir Tiamat
07-14-2009, 01:29 AM
Sir Tiamat, by realms you mean domains? Because it is possible to be in charge of a realm but have no holdings by purely being a provincial regent. The holdings within the realm may be vassals or independent from the provincial regent.

The word "domain" has been used by us mainly to imply that a domain regent has at least one holding of some sort under their control. Strictly speaking, a realm is a subset of domains.

Sorontar

You are correct, I incorrectly referred to domains as realms. I just reread the BRCS and a realm is a domain with at least one province: indeed a subset of domains. It seems that I needlessly complicated things by wrongly referring to realm where I meant domain... :|

Ps Thank you for pointing my mistake out to me, I have now clarified my earlier posts. :)

Vicente
07-14-2009, 09:27 AM
I still do not understand, I hope by making my points clear, your points will also become clear to me. ;)

In the proposed system I asign one set of six ability scores to the entire domain - in other words the total collection of holding and source levels under one regent. These six "ability scores" help determine how well the domain can cary out specific skills, just like ability scores help determine your skills at the character level.

Holding and source holding levels are tools in the proposed system, they are used as weapons and to cary out tasks - in other words skills - at the province level. They work similar to thieves tools, that provide a + to a skill check or a sword +3 at the character level.

The system of province levels and source levels will not change in the proposed system; they will continue to set a limitation on the maximum number holding of source holding levels within a province.

Ah.. perhaps I was unclear because I did not use the proper term for source holding...
In my earlier posts where I said source levels I mean source holding levels, which can indeed be confusing. My appologies. :)

Crystal clear now, then forget what I said :)

irdeggman
07-14-2009, 10:25 AM
Something to also consider is how these scores reflect the physical aspects of the province (which is one of the reasons why I think you need to seriously look at individual provinces and not just the domain itself).

The more people (actually better described as the more economic development) in a province the less "nature" there is - that is the physical landscape is modified to make room for the people - trees are cut down and farms are developed, etc. Elven lands are the exception of course.

The changes in the physical landscape reflect how the land's current potential for defending against/attacking via magic.

These are the things I have been trying to make a connection with the domain ability scores.

Sir Tiamat
07-14-2009, 11:10 AM
Something to also consider is how these scores reflect the physical aspects of the province (which is one of the reasons why I think you need to seriously look at individual provinces and not just the domain itself).

The more people (actually better described as the more economic development) in a province the less "nature" there is - that is the physical landscape is modified to make room for the people - trees are cut down and farms are developed, etc. Elven lands are the exception of course.

The changes in the physical landscape reflect how the land's current potential for defending against/attacking via magic.

These are the things I have been trying to make a connection with the domain ability scores.

I am not sure what you mean with "potential". A province with a higher source level, could support more source holdings and would therefore have more magic potential?

I do not see how the physical landscape should reflect the magical attack capabilities of a domain perse. Granted, a more developed province could not support the same source holding level and the source holding level would affect the magical attack capabilities. However, a domain consisting of a single level 1 source holding should have the same magical attack capabilities irrespective of the development of the province.

I want to keep the domain scores seperate from province development, because although province development caps the holding potential of a domain it does not directly affect the attributes of a domain. A domain consisting of a level two guild holding in a developed area, should not be required to be different from in scores from a similar level two guild domain in an undeveloped area. Surely there are to be likely differences between the domains, but these should mostly cosmetic. Incorperating cosmetical differences between two similar domains in the mechanics would in my view become needlesly complex.

Further note that in the current proposal there is no such thing as a magic defence. As per fourth edition, all attacks, including magic attacks target one out of four defences - i.e. fortification, resilience, security, or loyalty - depending on the attack power. These defences are based on the characteristics of the domain and the targetted holding.

irdeggman
07-14-2009, 01:40 PM
I am not sure what you mean with "potential". A province with a higher source level, could support more source holdings and would therefore have more magic potential?

I do not see how the physical landscape should reflect the magical attack capabilities of a domain perse. Granted, a more developed province could not support the same source holding level and the source holding level would affect the magical attack capabilities. However, a domain consisting of a single level 1 source holding should have the same magical attack capabilities irrespective of the development of the province.



These are precisely the things that are a deviation from core BR setting principles - that is what I have been trying to call your attention to.

As a core BR setting principle mebhaighl is the arcane magic power of the world and it is directly tied to the development of the land (inversely). That is forests and mountains contain more mebhaighl that can be tapped than do cities and farm lands.

Sir Tiamat
07-14-2009, 02:39 PM
These are precisely the things that are a deviation from core BR setting principles - that is what I have been trying to call your attention to. I do not understand why.


As a core BR setting principle mebhaighl is the arcane magic power of the world and it is directly tied to the development of the land (inversely). That is forests and mountains contain more mebhaighl that can be tapped than do cities and farm lands.

True, and I have no desire to change that.

Domain ability scores are not intended to refer to the nature of the lands. They refer to the human - or others races' - creations. The ability scores are designed to represent the collective abilities of the regent and its followers.

The nature of the land/province, will continue to exist of a province level and a source level irrespective of domain ability scores.

Forests and mountains will continue to provide high levels of mebhail. However these high levels of mebhail are not part of the domain until they are harnassed in source holdings.

irdeggman
07-14-2009, 04:07 PM
I am not sure what you mean with "potential". A province with a higher source level, could support more source holdings and would therefore have more magic potential?

I do not see how the physical landscape should reflect the magical attack capabilities of a domain perse. Granted, a more developed province could not support the same source holding level and the source holding level would affect the magical attack capabilities. However, a domain consisting of a single level 1 source holding should have the same magical attack capabilities irrespective of the development of the province.



I disagree with this one totally.

A Source (1) versus a Source (10) is a vast difference in magical power. The higher source level allows access to higher level realm spells, which in a logical power progressive system (like 4th ed) translates into more powerful spells.

So a higher source level should have a higher magical attack potential (or rating).

A similar perspective exists for developed province. The higher the development the better and more troops the province can support.

Look at the Imperial city. Basically a 10/0 province. Tremendous troop capacity but no magic potential. This excluded the use of things like ley lines but those are things that tie difference provinces together.

irdeggman
07-14-2009, 04:13 PM
Domain ability scores are not intended to refer to the nature of the lands. They refer to the human - or others races' - creations. The ability scores are designed to represent the collective abilities of the regent and its followers.

But sources and all other types of holdings are mutually exclusive of each other by definition, except for elven lands.

Sources do not have a "follower" relationship unlike the other types of holdings. It is instead a bonding of the wizard and the land itself (unspoiled and uncultivated).


The nature of the land/province, will continue to exist of a province level and a source level irrespective of domain ability scores.

Forests and mountains will continue to provide high levels of mebhail. However these high levels of mebhail are not part of the domain until they are harnassed in source holdings.


Logic (and the setting itself) dictates that this can't be - it is impossible for a province, again esxcept for elven lands, to support a high level of development and and a high level of source potential at the same time.

AndrewTall
07-14-2009, 08:59 PM
I do not understand why.

At least in part game balance - currently you either have high wealth/industry or high magic, or a trade off between the two. If there is no trade off then the stronger economic realms have no compensating factor to help the economically inferior realms survive - and there is no reason for a ruler not to max out all areas of power.

I think that your system has a similar effect at one remove - a mountain will have low possible domain score and high mebhaighl potential, a plains the converse.

The direct link between increasing domain power reducing source potential is being lost which reduces conflict (the source holder will not oppose any increase) and makes economically realms more powerful (since no source potential is lost) making it less likely that less populous realms could survive. That moves you away from typical BR issues of the forest realm resisting the plains realm by use of more powerful magic to outweigh the plains realm's economic power.

Sir Tiamat
07-14-2009, 09:54 PM
I will now post a short comment and expand at a later time (when it is not so late) ;)


As I see it, we are dealing with a misunderstanding. It seems that I am currently failing to make clear what I mean.

I totally agree with you points: development hampers source potential and in the proposed system I intend to keep it that way.

The proposed system does not deal with source potential and development, it leaves it intact as per the AD&D rules. Apart from province levels and source levels, I attach ability scores to each domain. Agian these scores are intended to represent the domain, I do not wish to change rthe province and source levels. Province and source levels will continue to work as before, however domains -the total number of holdings under a single regent - would receive a score in six abilities.

It is quite frustrating that either I am not able to understand your points, or I am not able to clearly communicate my design... :(

irdeggman
07-14-2009, 11:56 PM
I will now post a short comment and expand at a later time (when it is not so late) ;)


As I see it, we are dealing with a misunderstanding. It seems that I am currently failing to make clear what I mean.

I totally agree with you points: development hampers source potential and in the proposed system I intend to keep it that way.

The proposed system does not deal with source potential and development, it leaves it intact as per the AD&D rules. Apart from province levels and source levels, I attach ability scores to each domain. Agian these scores are intended to represent the domain, I do not wish to change rthe province and source levels. Province and source levels will continue to work as before, however domains -the total number of holdings under a single regent - would receive a score in six abilities.

It is quite frustrating that either I am not able to understand your points, or I am not able to clearly communicate my design... :(

The point is that we do not see any way to make the connection between high source potential and a specific ability score or one that makes there be a trade off between the source ability score and the economic ability score.

It appears it is all DM fiat and everything is considered when you do it, we just don't see the transparency.

Sorontar
07-15-2009, 12:04 AM
I believe that I am sort of understanding both sides here so I will try to summarise.

Irdeggman has been pointing out:

Each province has a maximum number of *possible* non-source holdings defined by its province level
Each province has a maximum number of *possible* source holdings defined by its source potential level.
Mebhaighl is everywhere but there is more of it available when a province has been less developed.
Provinces with high levels are more likely to be more developed than provinces with lower levels.
As province level increases, the source potential level decreases.
The terrain limits how much the province level can increase to.


At this point I will point out that just because the province level is high, does not mean that it actually has any non-source holdings. Likewise, the source potential level is the "potential" source holdings, so there may not actually be any (and often aren't).

What Sir Tiamat has said is:

A source holding (level 1) is the same strength regardless of what province it is in.
So source holding (1) in a province of source potential (4) is equal in magical strength to a source holding (1) in a province with source potential (1).
For neither of those source holdings does their magical strength get affected immediately by the province levels, ie. what level of development/population etc may be in the province.


The problem is deciding what to do if a magical attack occurs against a province (not a holding). Sir Tiamat is saying that under 4ed the rules would deal with the effect of the magic not the fact that it is magical. Therefore, any provincial defenses would not be combating magic, they would be resisting what the magic does to them. Therefore, it is irrelevant what a province's source potential level is and whether there are actually any source holdings in the province. They are not what is combating the magic.

Irdeggman countered by saying that in BR it is the land's magic that would be combatting any magical attack. The more mebh. in the province, the better the defence. The more mebh in the province, the higher the source potential level. The higher the source potential level, the lower the province level (let's forget about elves for a moment). A province's magical defenses don't require actual source holdings.

I hope I haven't misrepresented anyone's comments here. I also hope I haven't confused things even further.

Sorontar.

irdeggman
07-15-2009, 12:49 AM
Pretty close Sorontar.

I just think that somehow there should be an interlock that says the total ability scores associated with development and with sources should be tied together so that there is some sort of trade off between the two.

Or better the scores for development and sources should be tied to the province itself. What I mean is that is should be impossible to have a high source score in a province 10/0 (barring things like ley lines that is).

Oh and I agree with Sir Tiamat that a source (1) is the same regardless of where it is located. But I never saw a tie between the holding levels and the ability scores either (it was not transparent in the posts). I might not have been clear on this one in my posts.

Sir Tiamat
07-15-2009, 06:09 AM
I believe that I am sort of understanding both sides here so I will try to summarise.

[snipped]

I hope I haven't misrepresented anyone's comments here. I also hope I haven't confused things even further.

Sorontar.


Thank you for your intervention. :D

Sir Tiamat
07-15-2009, 07:04 AM
Pretty close Sorontar.

I just think that somehow there should be an interlock that says the total ability scores associated with development and with sources should be tied together so that there is some sort of trade off between the two.

Or better the scores for development and sources should be tied to the province itself. What I mean is that is should be impossible to have a high source score in a province 10/0 (barring things like ley lines that is).

Oh and I agree with Sir Tiamat that a source (1) is the same regardless of where it is located. But I never saw a tie between the holding levels and the ability scores either (it was not transparent in the posts). I might not have been clear on this one in my posts.
I am grateful for your input :)

You pointed out that you see no tie between holding levels and ability scores. That is correct; currently there is no specific relation between holding levels and the ability scores. There should be, but this link is not yet developed.

I do have some general principles how I would like to tie holding levels to ability scores:

Larger domains, - i.e. domains comprising of a greater number of holding levels - should have higher scores than smaller domains.
Different holding types would contribute to different abilities.
The total number of holding levels rather than the holding levels per province would contribute to the ability score.


The ability scores should represent the collective characteristics of your entire domain: the multitude of talents, resources and abilities of the regent and all of his/her followers. As such, they are not tied to development or to magic. The proposed mechanic is not designed to represent specific holdings or provinces, nor is it designed to deal with the level of province development or the level of mebhail within provinces. In the proposed system provinces would simply retain their development and mebhail score.


The main problem of the system I propose is how to create a believable and yet simple to use these aggregate domain ability scores to take actions at the province level. I think this can be done but again I have not worked it all out just yet.

irdeggman
07-15-2009, 10:35 AM
I am grateful for your input :)


You are welcome. Like I said originally I think this concept has promise.



You pointed out that you see no tie between holding levels and ability scores. That is correct; currently there is no specific relation between holding levels and the ability scores. There should be, but this link is not yet developed.



I do have some general principles how I would like to tie holding levels to ability scores:

Larger domains, - i.e. domains comprising of a greater number of holding levels - should have higher scores than smaller domains.
Different holding types would contribute to different abilities.
The total number of holding levels rather than the holding levels per province would contribute to the ability score.


This is starting to make more sense to me. Although I think that the total number times the level of the holdings in question is a more realistic method.

5 level 1 holdings are not worth more than a single level 5 holding. Much more can be done with a single level 5 holding than can be done with 5 level 1 ones. The size of the holding determines the level of realm spell that can be cast and the type and number of troops that can be mustered, as well as the economic generation of the holding.


The ability scores should represent the collective characteristics of your entire domain: the multitude of talents, resources and abilities of the regent and all of his/her followers. As such, they are not tied to development or to magic. The proposed mechanic is not designed to represent specific holdings or provinces, nor is it designed to deal with the level of province development or the level of mebhail within provinces. In the proposed system provinces would simply retain their development and mebhail score.


The main problem of the system I propose is how to create a believable and yet simple to use these aggregate domain ability scores to take actions at the province level. I think this can be done but again I have not worked it all out just yet.


I think that the "difficulty" here is that you are pushing for a domain level score and then trying to use that for domain level actions.

While nice for "color", in practice I don't think this will prove very useful.

Most actions are not performed at the domain level but rather at the province or specific holding level.

While keeping scores at the province level exponentially increases the difficulty (e.g., booking) of your system it is actually essential to game play.

For instance what is the true contribution the loyalty, mobilization and size of a law holding 3 provinces away has when one is defending an attack a law holding in a different location?

I think if you focus on individual provinces first, then a system to roll them up to represent the domain will be much easier.

BR is by it's very nature a book keeping nightmare and I don't really see a way that easily eliminates that aspect fo the game. The best we can hope for is a system that can be arranged to make automatic calculations easier (e.g., something that lends itself to spreadsheets or something similar).

Sorontar
07-15-2009, 10:43 AM
The proposed mechanic is not designed to represent specific holdings or provinces,

So what do you do for the king who has control of one or more provinces and a few law holdings? Do you only use the holdings?

And what about the King who has no holdings but has a vassal/s who is in charge of the law holdings.

Sorontar.

AndrewTall
07-15-2009, 03:07 PM
So what do you do for the king who has control of one or more provinces and a few law holdings? Do you only use the holdings?

And what about the King who has no holdings but has a vassal/s who is in charge of the law holdings.

Sorontar.

I think what you would do if working from a 'build up' basis is total the 'friendly' domain holdings in the province and use the sum of the accumulated strengths when determining attack/defense values.

You could make the increase in power non-linear to reflect a L3 holding being better than 3 level 1's if you wanted to.

Tying in the trade-off, you could have some of the benefits of larger populous holdings have a negative impact on source holdings, rather than all changes being purely additive. That way as people power up their domain they have to trade off. So if someone wants to increase income with a grand highway, series of water wheels, terraces, or whatever else you use to represent increased output, they get an advantage (higher output and stats) at the cost of impairing the magic level. This shifts the trade-off from population to industrialisation but that doesn't sound too wrong.

Sir Tiamat
07-15-2009, 11:19 PM
So what do you do for the king who has control of one or more provinces and a few law holdings? Do you only use the holdings?

As I see it now, one would use a basic score, modified by the total number of holdings (and other modifiers such as domain level). This means that a king with more provinces and fewer holdings will generally have lower ability scores than a king with less provinces and more holdings. The poor "puppet" king with a large number of provinces and few holdings under his rule may have the legitimacy, but not the power sources required for effective rule.




And what about the King who has no holdings but has a vassal/s who is in charge of the law holdings.

Sorontar.

good point.

In my mind there are two ways to resolve vassalage:

The vassal has its own score and will (mostly/sometimes) act on behalf of the king.
The holdings of the vassal count towards the score of the king as long as the vassal supports the king.


Currently I think the latter option is best, but I am open to other opinions and suggestions.

Sir Tiamat
07-15-2009, 11:44 PM
This is starting to make more sense to me. Although I think that the total number times the level of the holdings in question is a more realistic method.

5 level 1 holdings are not worth more than a single level 5 holding. Much more can be done with a single level 5 holding than can be done with 5 level 1 ones. The size of the holding determines the level of realm spell that can be cast and the type and number of troops that can be mustered, as well as the economic generation of the holding.


I agree that this would be more realistic, but would this not imply a large costs in playability for a rather small gain in realism? A level 5 holding will continue to be more effective (localy) than 5 level 1 holdings, but do we also need to represent this in the scores?



I think that the "difficulty" here is that you are pushing for a domain level score and then trying to use that for domain level actions.

true



While nice for "color", in practice I don't think this will prove very useful.

Most actions are not performed at the domain level but rather at the province or specific holding level.


in the current systems (Ad&D & 3.x) most actions are performed at the province level using only province resources. The question is do they need to be.



While keeping scores at the province level exponentially increases the difficulty (e.g., booking) of your system it is actually essential to game play.

Is it really? The level of Book keeping is a major issue in Birthright, perhaps even the biggest issue with the setting. Though fun for some, most of us tend to struggle finding fellow players that do not get tired of the birthright book keeping really fast.
[/quote]

For instance what is the true contribution the loyalty, mobilization and size of a law holding 3 provinces away has when one is defending an attack a law holding in a different location?
This is offcourse little. I think one might make a case that these scores represent the average of the domain and are then modifieed at the province level providing a + to defences.

I think if you focus on individual provinces first, then a system to roll them up to represent the domain will be much easier. which IMO would probably mean extensive book keeping.


BR is by it's very nature a book keeping nightmare and I don't really see a way that easily eliminates that aspect fo the game. The best we can hope for is a system that can be arranged to make automatic calculations easier (e.g., something that lends itself to spreadsheets or something similar).

I myself am not convinced that BR needs to be a book keeping nightmare if we are willing to sacrifice some realism. I see birthright still as an uncut or roughly gem, with major playability issues. Let us cut this gem that it may shine! ;)

Sir Tiamat
07-15-2009, 11:49 PM
Tying in the trade-off, you could have some of the benefits of larger populous holdings have a negative impact on source holdings, rather than all changes being purely additive. That way as people power up their domain they have to trade off. So if someone wants to increase income with a grand highway, series of water wheels, terraces, or whatever else you use to represent increased output, they get an advantage (higher output and stats) at the cost of impairing the magic level. This shifts the trade-off from population to industrialisation but that doesn't sound too wrong.

Interesting point, I think we should explore this.

irdeggman
07-16-2009, 01:28 AM
in the current systems (Ad&D & 3.x) most actions are performed at the province level using only province resources. The question is do they need to be.

IMO yes they do.

For one it is "cheaper" both in GB and RP to perform a smaller action than a larger one. What I mean is that to focus on a single holding than on an entire domain. If it becomes just as easy to do whole domain level actions then that is what everyone will do and IMO it "cheapens" the game a lot.

For another by making domain level actions this reduces the ability to expand one's domain. Now instead of targetting a single holding you are going against an entire domain.

Also by accounting at the province level things like various degrees of loyalty can be better represented. Effects of troop occupation, great captain random events snd things like that all have much easier manner of being represented and handled.



Is it really? The level of Book keeping is a major issue in Birthright, perhaps even the biggest issue with the setting. Though fun for some, most of us tend to struggle finding fellow players that do not get tired of the birthright book keeping really fast.


Which is why making simplier spreadsheets makes it easier.

Since the AD&D version of BR computers have come a very long way so that almost everyone has one and spreadsheets and databases are extremely common place.

So very many people play similar PC games where they have to keep track of their "resources" also that I don't think this is as big a deal as it once was.


This is offcourse little. I think one might make a case that these scores represent the average of the domain and are then modifieed at the province level providing a + to defences.
which IMO would probably mean extensive book keeping.

But this does seem to be a better representative of what is going on in the game.