Dwarven Holdings

[Gryffon Towser]

Hi all.

I am searching for any writtings on how to play with dwarven holdings.

Looking for anyone that has worked up a playable idea on how their underground facilities are affected/un-affected by surface wars.

After all, if they are attacked, shouldn't they have the right to move into their mountain fortresses and shut the gates, effectively sealing themselvs away from the outside world?

Welcome to any and all comments on this subject.

[kgauck]

I ran a campaign in Baruk-Azhik, but I dealt with many of the these aspects
by describing them as differences in perception, not reality. The dwarves
can`t lock themselves away forever. All life ultimatly derives from Avani`s
warmth, so the dwarves need to get to the surface to farm and herd most of
the time. The dwarves are very diligent and preparedness-minded, so I can
imagine a two year supply of food and materials suplimented by geo-thermal
agriculture, raids of their own herds and farms, and even eating rocks
(vitamins and minerals, yes, calories, no). So dwarves can last much longer
inside their undergound fortresses much longer than a besieging army can
just loiter about in mountains. While I might declare this time period to
be 2 years +, no one has ever actually been able to lay down a siege and
wait the dwarves out, so as far as the humans are concerned, it may as well
be a thousand years.

You can knock, but that doesn`t mean the dwarves will answer. They may be
farming and herding until their scouts alert them to arrivals in the passes
and bridges. Then, if they don`t want to meet you, your arrival finds only
deserted fields and quiet hills and valleys. You might suppose that because
they didn`t greet visitors for a hundred years, they have been locked in
their fortresses for a hundred years. That`s not how it actually happens.

The dwarves are to the mountains what the elves are to the forest. They are
at home and in their element. You aren`t. They can move quickly in rough,
moving their full movement when you are moving at half yours, or at 3/4
normal dwarven movement when you are moving at 1/4 yours. They arrange
excellent ambushes in key passes, on steep passages, from hieghts, and using
other obstacles. They always attack from above (higher elevation) and use
their crossbows to excellent effect. By means a of tunnel network, they can
put raiding parties on the surface to cut you off from your supply trains
and reinforcements, leaving you alone in the mountains. If pursued, the
dwarves just retreat uphill. How far can you run uphill? They will run up
in stages under the cross bow (or sling) cover of the others. Will you run
uphill while dwarven missiles hail down?

If dwarves remain in the mountains and those hills near to mountains, they
can remain unaffected by the wars and disturbances of others by keeping
sentries and making use of their fortresses. But when not requried, they
return to the surface to harvest their crops and tend their animals. Their
crops are root crops and tubers for the most part. Such crops share the
dwarven affection for dwelling under ground, and are harder to disturb. A
potato field or carrot patch can`t be destroyed nearly as easily as a field
of grain. In the mean time, who`s watching your supplies?

The dwarves build for the long term. This means they build in stone, not
wood. Wood is a useful material, but you don`t build in it. Buildings may
exist at the surface level, but where humans build *on* the surface, dwarves
build just under it. They will excavate the area for a house, build a stone
house in the pit, then put the dirt on top of the house. Dirt might be used
for terracing fields as well. The only way in is throught the door, which
might be impenetrable iron doors, or secret stonework doors in an otherwise
unassuming rock face. Family compounds are linked by secret tunnels, though
each house is normally defended by the family whose favored class is
Fighter.

The effects described in the books are more or less valid on the realm
level, although as far as I am concerned, the way the dwarves achieve these
ends are not as the humans take them to be.

Kenneth Gauck
kgauck@mchsi.com

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[A_dark]

I believe that dwarves can in fact stay forever sealed. Kheleb Izhil in the Khinasi is sealed, however it is also defenseless. Let me explain.

If the dwarves seal themselves inside their mountain fortress then the sieger can simply settle on the surface nothing would stop him since the dwarves are inside and there is no enemy outside.

Another thing that you must consider is that unlike a normal siege, the dwarves are totally unable to trade. In a normal siege, the guildhall of the town is not inside the castle, but in this case, it is.

Erm, I don't know what else to add.

White Hand :P

[Gryffon Towser]

Another thing that you must consider is that unlike a normal siege, the dwarves are totally unable to trade. In a normal siege, the guildhall of the town is not inside the castle, but in this case, it is.
Well, in the Baruk-Azhik Players Secrets it describes them as having many underground roads in the realm, even some leading to other realms, giving them the ability to trade within their underground provinces.
As BA has two distinct land types (mountains, hills), in game terms this gives them the ability to trade between those provinces. Correct? (thanks WH)
----------
Kenneth...
That is as near perfect a description of comprehending the dwarven mindset as I have ever read. Brings back to mind the way Dennis McKiernan and Tolkien wrote about dwarves. Fantastic background to use, thank you.

What I need though, is samples of how to actually manage this underground effects upon the dwarven nations in a birthright campaign.
It is very likely we will have a major assault on a dwarven realm in our campaign game, and us DMs are at odds on how to do this.

[geeman]

At 05:46 PM 6/16/2002 +0200, Gryffon Towser wrote:

>What I need though, is samples of how to actually manage this underground
>effects upon the dwarven nations in a birthright campaign.
>It is very likely we will have a major assault on a dwarven realm in our
>campaign game, and us DMs are at odds on how to do this.

Here are some suggestions:

1. You could consider all dwarven provinces and holdings automatically
fortified up to their population level automatically to reflect the
difficulty of attempting to deal with a population that exists mainly
underground.

2. Give dwarven provinces free dwarven units and/or having them raise such
units as "levies."

3. In most cases the battles inside dwarven provinces should give the
advantages of terrain to the dwarven commander as well. If you use the
::shudder:: warcards you might want to allow the defending dwarven
commander more "mountain" terrain cards to be placed on the battle map at
his discretion.

4. Accurate intelligence information might also be difficult to collect not
only given the physical nature of dwarven dwellings, but the insular nature
of their culture, so you could increase the difficulty of performing
espionage actions having to do with gathering information about the numbers
and types of units that exist in dwarven provinces.

5. Personally, I use several additional abilities that regents can train
their companies of soldiers, one of which is "mountaineering" which
basically allows a unit of soldiers that occupies a province with
mountainous terrain to operate away from their home provinces without
paying additional maintenance costs and also allows them to appear anywhere
on the map during a battle to attack with "surprise" (one free battle round
of attack.) Dwarven units could all automatically have this training or
get it very cheaply. I`ve ruled that they must appear in appropriate
terrain, but since I use a much larger grid for large scale combat, there
is no restriction on the types and amounts of terrain possible, so you`d
probably need to go with the multiple mountainous terrain option in order
for this to really be much of an advantage.

6. You could assume a dwarven commander automatically has the Strategy
proficiency--or whatever 3e equivalent you use--when defending dwarven
provinces or, if he already has that proficiency, assume he has it "twice"
in comparison to a non-dwarven commander who could not possibly be as
familiar with the terrain.

7. The effects of a whole unit using moraskorr weapons is kind of
debatable, but you might consider giving a unit or three of the dwarven
units a superior melee value to reflect them being so armed. Elite units
with other superior stats are also perfectly plausible.

8. You might also want to consider the issue of magic and realm
spells. Dwarves are not allowed access to the wizard class in 2e, of
course, and one could certainly maintain that restriction in 3e. But thing
about giving them access to a human ally and/or some sort of exceptional
dwarven character who has arcane or other mystical powers like the ghostly
Grimm Graybeard in the Baruk Azhik sourcebook.

9. All of those things made easier for dwarves in rugged, mountainous
terrain could be made more difficult for non-dwarven units in such terrain,
so you could give the opposite effects to most of the things listed above
to non-dwarves who invade. Their movement rates, of course, are affected
by terrain, but units of cavalry may not be able to charge, the range of
missile attacks might be limited, the engineers less effective, the
maintenance costs for keeping non-dwarf units abroad might be
higher. Things like that.

Hope that helps,
Gary

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[kgauck]

1) you can`t pillage dwarven holdings unless you gain access to the
fortress. May be you could, with great effort reduce a province a single
level - representing some outlying infrastructure - but that`s about it.
2) A siege doesn`t reduce the defensibility of dwarven defences, unless a
race of miners (other dwarves, orogs, &c) conducts a major part of the
siege.
3) There are no rules for logistics in BR, and in most provinces its
possible to imagine even a dozen units subsisting for quite a while without
too great an effort. Of course some places, like the Giantdowns, dwarven
mountains, and some of the worst Khinasi deserts can`t support armies. 95%
of all food needs to be dragged up into the mountains by the besieging army.
Doubling or trippling unit maintenence costs would be one way to represent
this.
4) The favored class for dwarves is Fighter, so commoners and experts can
easily afford to multi-class as fighters or warriors (assuming the favored
class permits both). That makes for a tough militia. The warcards unit
"Khurin-Azur Miners" is probabaly a fair representation of dwarven
militia/levy.
5) Dwarves will take and hold high ground, in war card terms that`s a +1 to
all combat ratings.
6) Dwarves probabaly produce field fortifications made of wood very quickly.
Ditches, wooden palisades, the kind of "giant caltrops" that prevent cavalry
charges, other kinds of cover producing-movement impeeding constructs should
be a routine part of dwarven battles on the defensive.
7) Given the dwarven skill at building battlefield enhancements, their slow
speed in march (especially away from rough terrain), and their personalities
all suggest that dwarves prefer to fight battles on the tactical defensive.
They dig in, fight and cause highly favorable casualty ratios. If
neccesary, they fall back into hills, rough, or even mountainside terrain.
8) Dwarves are famous for two kinds of multi-class options fighter/rogue and
fighter/cleric. Fighter/rogues are tough scouts. Capable of sneaking up
and setting up potent ambushes. Fighter/clerics not only provide healing,
but also morale enhancing spells. A battle magic version of Remove Fear
would eliminate Fallback results and increase the already high morale of
dwarven troops by one (and that generally means a morale of 4!)
9) By combining field fortifications, high morale, and high defensive
ratings, a very small number of dwarves could be very hard to push out of a
possition. On the contrary, non-dwarves would begin to suffer morale
effects from being ambushed, harassed by archers in the mountains shooting
down, high casualty ratios, and the inability to do any real harm to the
dwarves. At least against humans you get to pillage a town every once and a
while. Enemy troops might lose a morale rating after a certain number of
encounters, as long as the enemy troops remain in mountain terrain. Dwarves
might really be attacking enemy morale as much as they are attacking the
physical strength of the enemy.

Kenneth Gauck
kgauck@mchsi.com

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[ConjurerDragon]

The best solution I see is to consider ALL dwarven holdings in dwarven
lands to be fortified.
bye
Michael
*************************

brnetboard@TUARHIEVEL.ORG wrote:

>A_dark wrote:
> I believe that dwarves can in fact stay forever sealed. Kheleb Izhil in the Khinasi is sealed, however it is also defenseless. Let me explain.
>
>If the dwarves seal themselves inside their mountain fortress then the sieger can simply settle on the surface nothing would stop him since the dwarves are inside and there is no enemy outside.
>
>Another thing that you must consider is that unlike a normal siege, the dwarves are totally unable to trade. In a normal siege, the guildhall of the town is not inside the castle, but in this case, it is.
>
>Erm, I don`t know what else to add.
>
>White Hand :P
>
>************************************************** **************************
>The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
>To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
>with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.
>

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[Lord Grave]

> 1. You could consider all dwarven provinces and holdings
> automatically fortified up to their population level
> automatically to reflect the difficulty of attempting to deal
> with a population that exists mainly underground.

I would consider Dwarves fortified against outside assaults, but when
being attacked by Orogs or other Dwarves, they would have to build
underground fortifications or fight without adventage. I would also
apply similar rule to Elves fighting in the forest.

I think that level 10 for every province wouldn`t be too much for the
Dwarves. I don`t think that it should depend on province level because
bonus comes from natural caverns, not the province level.

>
> 2. Give dwarven provinces free dwarven units and/or having
> them raise such units as "levies."

Of course.

> 8. You might also want to consider the issue of magic and
> realm spells. Dwarves are not allowed access to the wizard
> class in 2e, of course, and one could certainly maintain that
> restriction in 3e. But thing about giving them access to a
> human ally and/or some sort of exceptional dwarven character
> who has arcane or other mystical powers like the ghostly
> Grimm Graybeard in the Baruk Azhik sourcebook.

We(Khurin Azur) had help of human wizard in Warlords of Winter PBeM.
Didn`t help us much against Urga-Zai.

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[geeman]

At 03:02 AM 6/17/2002 +0200, Milos Rasic wrote:

> > 1. You could consider all dwarven provinces and holdings
> > automatically fortified up to their population level
> > automatically to reflect the difficulty of attempting to deal
> > with a population that exists mainly underground.
>
>I would consider Dwarves fortified against outside assaults, but when
>being attacked by Orogs or other Dwarves, they would have to build
>underground fortifications or fight without adventage. I would also
>apply similar rule to Elves fighting in the forest.

I don`t know. We`re still talking about tunnels and underground dwellings
here, and though orogs and other dwarves would be better at the sapping and
engineering techniques required to assault such fortification it`s not like
they can pass through the stone. I think this might be better reflected by
giving orog and dwarven engineers a bit of a bonus when attacking
underground units, but I wouldn`t erase the fortification entirely.

> > 8. You might also want to consider the issue of magic and
> > realm spells. Dwarves are not allowed access to the wizard
> > class in 2e, of course, and one could certainly maintain that
> > restriction in 3e. But thing about giving them access to a
> > human ally and/or some sort of exceptional dwarven character
> > who has arcane or other mystical powers like the ghostly
> > Grimm Graybeard in the Baruk Azhik sourcebook.
>
>We(Khurin Azur) had help of human wizard in Warlords of Winter PBeM.
>Didn`t help us much against Urga-Zai.

No? Well, YMMV, I guess. The inability of dwarves to become wizards does
place a pretty serious limitation on them at the domain level, especially
since mountainous provinces tend to have high source levels
available. Personally, I think it`s arguable whether dwarves should be
able to rule up their population levels without damaging their potential
sources like elves, and their priests might be able to use sources to power
their realm spells in the same way druids/priests of Erik _should_ be able
to do.

Gary

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

[kgauck]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Gary" <geeman@SOFTHOME.NET>
Sent: Monday, June 17, 2002 2:54 PM


> I don`t know. We`re still talking about tunnels and underground dwellings
> here, and though orogs and other dwarves would be better at the sapping
> and engineering techniques required to assault such fortification it`s not
> like they can pass through the stone. I think this might be better
> reflected by giving orog and dwarven engineers a bit of a bonus when
> attacking underground units, but I wouldn`t erase the fortification
> entirely.

Normally, all you need to do to take a fortified province is to hang out
with as many units as the fortification rating of the province. Dwarves
have two advantages which will tend to negate this. One is that their
fortifications are hard to attack. Where its possible for archers to
support siege operations, and even horse units can act to forage widely,
defend siege equipment, &c, when the fortifications are underground, archers
cannot support attacks, and other kinds of troops are just as useless
(except as labor gangs). Only the siege units matter, and excavation must
preceed their use. Second, a significant part of the siege is the starving
of the occupants. Since the dwarves tend to have huge stores, and can at
least supliment their diet with subterrarian food sources, its analogous to
besieging a port city which retains control of the sea.

As a result, I might not just total all units, but count siege units fully
and count other units as half. Secondly, I might add a 4 week period before
the siege even begins during which excavation must occur.

> Personally, I think it`s arguable whether dwarves should be
> able to rule up their population levels without damaging their potential
> sources like elves, and their priests might be able to use sources to
> power their realm spells in the same way druids/priests of Erik
> _should_ be able to do.

I would think that dwarven development does reduce sources the same way that
human development does. The dwarves are more master-the-earth types than
live-in-harmony-with-the-earth types. I do see how, dwarves might be able
to use sources the same way druids might. But I would limit the possible
spells drawn to those with a special connection to the land, not just as a
extra source of power.

Kenneth Gauck
kgauck@mchsi.com

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.