Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 30

Thread: Regent classes

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    BR mailing list
    Posts
    1,562
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    So I`m trying to reconcile 3e`s free-for-all multiclassing with the 2e
    notion that certain classes get regency from certain holdings. With 3e, a
    fourth level character (fighter, rogue, cleric, wizard) could get full
    regency from all holdings. Actually, if you ignore the restrictions on
    paladin multiclassing (and many people do), you could do it at third
    level, paladin/rogue/wizard.

    I`ve seen suggestions that:
    - a regent should pick a `main` class and that`s his effective one for
    holding stuff.
    - just accept the multiclassing, allow them to get RPs as any class they
    have.
    - the highest level class is the one that counts.
    - probably more I`ve forgotten.

    I think the prestige/advanced class mechanic provides a good answer here.
    I`m going to use 4 prestige classes that solve the problem for me, and
    give a couple of other good features, too. They`re similar to the d20
    modern advanced classes in that their prereqs are rather low- many
    characters could go into them after first level in a regular class.

    Default: All characters gaing full regency from provinces in their realm.
    No RP is gained from any other holding the character controls.
    Additionally, by default all actions can only be domain actions- realm
    actions, affecting multiple holdings, are available only at prestige
    levels.

    **Lawyer**
    -Prereq: Knowledge (law) 3; blooded scion
    [knowledge-law is the equivalent of the Law proficiency from the
    BR rulebook. Class skill for anyone with general Knowledge as a
    class skill.]
    -BAB: As rogue
    -Good save: Will
    -Hit Die: d8
    -Class skills: As Aristocrat
    -Skill points: 6+Int modifier

    Class Features
    Level 1: Half Regency from law holdings.
    Level 2: Realm Actions. Rule (law holdings), agitate, and contest can be
    used as realm actions by the character.
    Level 3: Full Regency from law holdings.
    Level 4: Free action: Declare War can be used as a free action 1/domain
    turn.
    Level 5: Regent Privilege.


    **Templar**
    -Prereq: Knowledge (religion) 3; blooded scion; ability to cast 1st level
    divine spells
    -BAB: As rogue
    -Good save: Will
    -Hit Die: d8
    -Class skills: As Aristocrat and Cleric
    -Skill points: 6+Int modifier

    Class Features
    Level 1: Half Regency from temple holdings.
    Level 2: Realm Actions. Rule (temple holdings), agitate, and contest can
    be used as realm actions by the character.
    +1 spellcaster level (of original class).
    Realm spells can be cast at the character`s spellcaster level.
    Level 3: Full Regency from temple holdings.
    Level 4: Free action: Agitate can be used as a free action 1/domain turn.
    +1 spellcaster level.
    Level 5: Regent Privilege.
    +1 spellcaster level.


    **Guilder**
    -Prereq: Appraise 3; blooded scion
    -BAB: As rogue
    -Good save: Will
    -Hit Die: d8
    -Class skills: As Aristocrat
    -Skill points: 6+Int modifier

    Class Features
    Level 1: Half Regency from guild holdings.
    Level 2: Realm Actions. Rule (guild holdings), agitate, contest, and
    espionage can be used as realm actions by the character.
    Level 3: Full Regency from guild holdings.
    Level 4: Free action: Espionage can be used as a free action 1/domain turn.
    Level 5: Regent Privilege.

    **Sourceror**
    -Prereq: Knowledge (arcana) 3; blooded scion; ability to cast 1st level
    arcane spells
    -BAB: As wizard
    -Good save: Will
    -Hit Die: d6
    -Class skills: As Aristocrat and Wizard
    -Skill points: 6+Int modifier.

    Class Features
    Level 1: Half Regency from source holdings.
    Level 2: Realm Actions. Rule (source holdings) can be used as realm
    actions by the character.
    +1 spellcaster level (of original class).
    Realm spells can be cast at the character`s spellcaster level.
    Level 3: Full Regency from source holdings.
    Level 4: Free action: Scry can be used as a free action 1/domain turn,
    targetting any province where the regent controls a source.
    +1 spellcaster level.
    Level 5: Regent Privilege.
    +1 spellcaster level.

    **Notes**
    The regent privilege gained at level 5 for these classes is one of the
    privileges some genius came up with for pbem games. I`ve seen them
    several places, but an example list can be found at
    http://sdpbem.wz.cz/joining.html (hi Anakin). To these I would add:

    Merchant Prince (guilder): the character gains RPs from trade routes, as
    the thief did in the original rules. In addition, Trade Route as a realm
    action becomes available.

    By basing these only on a couple of low requirements, it makes the class
    available to pretty much anyone that`s willing to work for it. But to get
    full RPs for all holdings, rather than at 3rd level (worst case scenario),
    it would take a level of cleric, a level of wizard, and three levels of
    each class, total character level 14, and he`d be pretty ineffective.

    A spellcasting character who goes all the way in one of these loses two
    levels of spellcasting, but gains realm spells, RP, a free action, and a
    regent privilege.
    --
    Communication is possible only between equals.
    Daniel McSorley- mcsorley@cis.ohio-state.edu

    ************************************************** **************************
    The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
    Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
    To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
    with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.
    NOTE: Messages posted by Birthright-L are automatically inserted posts originating from the mailing list linked to the forum.

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    474
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    On Mon, 2002-12-02 at 13:15, daniel mcsorley wrote:
    > So I`m trying to reconcile 3e`s free-for-all multiclassing with the 2e
    > notion that certain classes get regency from certain holdings.

    It`s not a 2e notion - it`s a BR notion. That`s a huge distinction. It
    would be most incorrect to state that "in 2e this happened..." when in
    actuality it is nothing of the sort.

    The original BR rulebook:
    (1) restricted regents from collecting RP from all types of holding;
    such restriction was based on the regents character class
    (2) did not mention how multi-classed or dual-classed characters should
    collect regency

    The question raised by the (2) is of minor importance when the majority
    of characters have only one character class. But still requires a fair,
    equitable and justifiable answer - and one that takes into account the
    majority rule - and (1) - IS the majority rule.

    The difference now (in 3e) is that multi-classing is commonplace. An
    answer to (2) is more urgently required - but need not be any different
    (should not be) to an answer for 2e.

    With 3e, a
    > fourth level character (fighter, rogue, cleric, wizard) could get full
    > regency from all holdings. Actually, if you ignore the restrictions on
    > paladin multiclassing (and many people do), you could do it at third
    > level, paladin/rogue/wizard.
    >
    > I`ve seen suggestions that:
    > - a regent should pick a `main` class and that`s his effective one for
    > holding stuff.

    The above suggestion is the most obvious, and most conforming to the
    spirit of the original BR rulebook.
    (I) The majority rule holds in all cases, regardless of how many
    character classes a character has.

    It does however have some drawbacks:
    (i) Should such a decision be voluntary, or involuntary - i.e. can the
    player decide which character class to use in collecting RP
    (ii) `When` is this decision made?
    (iii) Can it be changed?, if so how often and under what circumstances?
    e.g. The situation can change as,
    (a) A player takes a new character class
    (B) A regent gains new holdings/provinces
    © A regent dies and his holdings/etc pass to his heir - who may be of
    a different character class


    > - just accept the multiclassing, allow them to get RPs as any class they
    > have.
    Seems very much against the spirit of the BR rules, but solves (a), (B),
    and ©. Certainly though, it has the effect of discouraging
    specialization - and encouraging domains that are:
    (A) pretty much similar in appearance/makeup (realm+guild+temple|source)
    (B) always a realm of some kind -- (but standard BR encourages this too)
    © almost always ruled by a realm/caster regent

    > - the highest level class is the one that counts.
    One method (an involuntary one) of deciding points (i), (ii), and (iii)
    above.

    > - probably more I`ve forgotten.
    >
    > I think the prestige/advanced class mechanic provides a good answer here.
    > I`m going to use 4 prestige classes that solve the problem for me, and
    > give a couple of other good features, too. They`re similar to the d20
    > modern advanced classes in that their prereqs are rather low- many
    > characters could go into them after first level in a regular class.
    >
    > Default: All characters gaing full regency from provinces in their realm.
    > No RP is gained from any other holding the character controls.
    > Additionally, by default all actions can only be domain actions- realm
    > actions, affecting multiple holdings, are available only at prestige
    > levels.

    Daniels solution suffers only one major drawback (and one minor), as it
    solves (a), (B), but not © above. (A character which `inherits` a
    domain - other than a realm - may be unprepared to collect regency in an
    efficient manner. Of course it could be argued that this would be a poor
    choice of heir for the previous regent to make, however it`s a more
    restrictive choice than previously. In fact (B) is only partially solved
    as well - characters who wish to add holdings of a different type to
    their base class may gain no benefit from them.)

    In effect he has created not four but five classes as `realm-ruler` is
    given to all by default. It has the elegance of allowing a character to
    rule any type of domain efficiently regardless of character class.

    The minor drawback is that he still hasn`t answered the original
    question (2) above. He`s just changed the `names` of the classes
    involved. It could be argued that it`s a `slip-in-under-the-table`
    argument for `collect from all` but we`ll make all a little more
    difficult. As such it`s tainted with the `not the intention of BR`
    argument.

    Personally, I like the simplest solutions best.

    My solution for 2e: (which of course works for 3e as well - but it`s
    much simpler as is less likely to appeal to those who like more
    convoluted systems)
    (1.1) `Regent class` not `character class` determines RP collection.
    (1.2) There are five(5) regent classes; realm, faith, guild, govern, and
    magic --- similar to what Daniel proposes
    (1.3) `Realm` regents collect RP for provinces, `Guild` regents collect
    RP for guilds/trade, etc etc --- Daniels classes have more complex
    collection rules, but are not dissimilar
    (1.4) A regent can have many `regent classes`. There is no cost, no
    penalty or restriction whatsoever. ---
    (1.5) But, a regent may only collect RP for one of his/her regent
    classes at his/her choice - but duh! - usually the one that yields the
    highest RP --- this final piece is an answer to (2), as well as (a),
    (B), and ©



    >
    > **Lawyer**
    > -Prereq: Knowledge (law) 3; blooded scion
    > [knowledge-law is the equivalent of the Law proficiency from the
    > BR rulebook. Class skill for anyone with general Knowledge as a
    > class skill.]
    > -BAB: As rogue
    > -Good save: Will
    > -Hit Die: d8
    > -Class skills: As Aristocrat
    > -Skill points: 6+Int modifier
    >
    > Class Features
    > Level 1: Half Regency from law holdings.
    > Level 2: Realm Actions. Rule (law holdings), agitate, and contest can be
    > used as realm actions by the character.
    > Level 3: Full Regency from law holdings.
    > Level 4: Free action: Declare War can be used as a free action 1/domain
    > turn.
    > Level 5: Regent Privilege.
    >
    >
    > **Templar**
    > -Prereq: Knowledge (religion) 3; blooded scion; ability to cast 1st level
    > divine spells
    > -BAB: As rogue
    > -Good save: Will
    > -Hit Die: d8
    > -Class skills: As Aristocrat and Cleric
    > -Skill points: 6+Int modifier
    >
    > Class Features
    > Level 1: Half Regency from temple holdings.
    > Level 2: Realm Actions. Rule (temple holdings), agitate, and contest can
    > be used as realm actions by the character.
    > +1 spellcaster level (of original class).
    > Realm spells can be cast at the character`s spellcaster level.
    > Level 3: Full Regency from temple holdings.
    > Level 4: Free action: Agitate can be used as a free action 1/domain turn.
    > +1 spellcaster level.
    > Level 5: Regent Privilege.
    > +1 spellcaster level.
    >
    >
    > **Guilder**
    > -Prereq: Appraise 3; blooded scion
    > -BAB: As rogue
    > -Good save: Will
    > -Hit Die: d8
    > -Class skills: As Aristocrat
    > -Skill points: 6+Int modifier
    >
    > Class Features
    > Level 1: Half Regency from guild holdings.
    > Level 2: Realm Actions. Rule (guild holdings), agitate, contest, and
    > espionage can be used as realm actions by the character.
    > Level 3: Full Regency from guild holdings.
    > Level 4: Free action: Espionage can be used as a free action 1/domain turn.
    > Level 5: Regent Privilege.
    >
    > **Sourceror**
    > -Prereq: Knowledge (arcana) 3; blooded scion; ability to cast 1st level
    > arcane spells
    > -BAB: As wizard
    > -Good save: Will
    > -Hit Die: d6
    > -Class skills: As Aristocrat and Wizard
    > -Skill points: 6+Int modifier.
    >
    > Class Features
    > Level 1: Half Regency from source holdings.
    > Level 2: Realm Actions. Rule (source holdings) can be used as realm
    > actions by the character.
    > +1 spellcaster level (of original class).
    > Realm spells can be cast at the character`s spellcaster level.
    > Level 3: Full Regency from source holdings.
    > Level 4: Free action: Scry can be used as a free action 1/domain turn,
    > targetting any province where the regent controls a source.
    > +1 spellcaster level.
    > Level 5: Regent Privilege.
    > +1 spellcaster level.
    >
    > **Notes**
    > The regent privilege gained at level 5 for these classes is one of the
    > privileges some genius came up with for pbem games. I`ve seen them
    > several places, but an example list can be found at
    > http://sdpbem.wz.cz/joining.html (hi Anakin). To these I would add:
    >
    > Merchant Prince (guilder): the character gains RPs from trade routes, as
    > the thief did in the original rules. In addition, Trade Route as a realm
    > action becomes available.
    >
    > By basing these only on a couple of low requirements, it makes the class
    > available to pretty much anyone that`s willing to work for it. But to get
    > full RPs for all holdings, rather than at 3rd level (worst case scenario),
    > it would take a level of cleric, a level of wizard, and three levels of
    > each class, total character level 14, and he`d be pretty ineffective.
    >
    > A spellcasting character who goes all the way in one of these loses two
    > levels of spellcasting, but gains realm spells, RP, a free action, and a
    > regent privilege.
    > --
    > Communication is possible only between equals.
    > Daniel McSorley- mcsorley@cis.ohio-state.edu
    >
    > ************************************************** **************************
    > The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
    > Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
    > 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
    Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
    To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
    with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    BR mailing list
    Posts
    1,562
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    My answer is more hands-down. IMC I solvet things like this:

    The character class inwhich you have the most levels determines which type
    of regency you can collect.

    If you have at lerast five levels in another class, you gain the additional
    benefit of collecting regency like a member of that class as well.

    The same applies to all class-specifc regency actions (realm spells, the
    rogue`s free espionage action and so on).

    /Carl


    __________________________________________________ ___
    Följ VM på nära håll på Yahoo!s officielle VM-sajt www.yahoo.se/vm2002
    Håll dig ajour med nyheter och resultat, med vinnare och förlorare...

    ************************************************** **************************
    The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
    Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
    To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
    with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.
    NOTE: Messages posted by Birthright-L are automatically inserted posts originating from the mailing list linked to the forum.

  4. #4
    Member Keovar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    SC, USA
    Posts
    42
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    I posted something similar to your idea in another thread. I also feel that regency should be handled via Prestige Classes, but I think that they should be obtainable as early as 2nd level. If you set up the requirements in certain ways, you allow the proper types of classes to meet the requirements for their type of domain earlier than others. Remember, one of the main guidelines for Prestige Classes is that you do not specifically require levels in certain classes, but you can certainly shape the "best" way to qualify for a class around key class features.

    ~Regency~
    There would be 4 types of Regent prestige classes, Law Regent, Temple Regent, Guild Regent, and Source Regent. These each have simple requirements, such as:

    Law Regent Requirements
    Template: Blooded
    Base Attack Bonus: +1
    Proficiency in all Martial Weapons
    Knowledge (Law): 2 ranks
    Special: Must be an heir or current ruler of a Law domain.

    (These requirements would only be easily met by one of the fighter-type classes, like Fighter, Ranger, Paladin, etc.)

    Temple Regent Requirements
    Template: Blooded
    Knowledge (Religion) or Knowledge (Nature): 4 ranks
    Spellcasting: must be able to cast 1st level Divine spells.
    Special: Must be an heir or current ruler of a Temple domain.

    (These requirements would limit access to Clerics, Druids, and higher level Paladins and Rangers.)

    Guild Regent Requirements
    Template: Blooded
    Appraise: 4 Ranks
    Diplomacy: 4 Ranks
    Bluff: 4 Ranks
    Profession (Merchant): 4 ranks
    Special: Must be an heir or current ruler of a Guild domain.

    (These requirements wouldn't completely limit the access to any classes, but only Rogues, Bards, Experts, and Aristocrats would have an easy time meeting the requirements at a low level.)

    Source Regent Requirements
    Template: Blooded
    Spellcraft: 4 ranks
    Spellcasting: must be able to cast 1st level Arcane spells.
    Special: Must be an heir or current ruler of a Source domain.

    (These requirements would limit access to Wizards, Sorcerors (if used) and higher level Bards)


    ---

    Each pclass would give the regent access to the proper domain actions to rule a domain. Having to take levels in these pclasses would be self-balancing, in that a player that wanted to rule all 4 types would need at least 7 classes to do so (Cleric, Temple Regent, Wizard, Source Regent, Fighter, Law Regent, and enough accumulated skill points to get Guild Regent), and would be rather weak as a whole.

    I think the Regent classes only need to be about 5 levels long, but alot of domain abilities could be packed into each level. To balance this, the progression of the "main feature" of each class type would be slowed in it's associated regent class. Law regents would gain Base Attack Bonus at the medium (cleric/rogue) rate, guild regents would only get 6 skill points per level, and temple and source regents would only advance their spellcasting abilities on levels 1, 3, and 5. This means that a Wizard 5/Source Regent 5 would be a weaker spellcaster than a Wizard 10, with a 5th-level familiar, one fewer Bonus Feat, and with an effective spellcaster level of only 8.

    Levels of these prestige classes could be added to existing BR NPCs, and their original class levels could be left intact or adjusted slightly. For example, the High Mage Alies could be a Wizard 15/ Source Regent 1 rather than a Wizard 16. His spellcasting abilities would be the same, and his limited regent abilities could be one reason for his tendency not to get involved with the politicking of other domains.

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    BR mailing list
    Posts
    1,562
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    On Mon, 2 Dec 2002, Ryan B. Caveney wrote:
    > > I`m not even convinced you should need divine spellcasting to rule a
    > > temple- however, the presence of miraculous casting in D&D is enough
    > > to sway me on this point.
    >
    > And RW religious figures, from Sumerian priests to medieval Popes to
    > modern televangelists, convince me that being perceived as the provider of
    > divine guidance is a source of immense political power. I`d suggest at
    > least half RP for non-spellcaster temple regents.

    Thing is, I don`t think temple regents get RP for their political power.
    I think they get it for their religious power- political power is
    represented by law holdings. Sumerian priests and medieval Popes, if run
    in BR, would have been big law and province regents, and I think you`re
    mixing that in with their religious power because real-world historically,
    there`s no difference. (Televangelists would be guilders, I suppose.)

    In a game with miraculous divine spellcasting, though, I think religious
    power deserves to be counted separately from economic power and political
    power. We have no historical parallel here, though, so it`s hard for me
    to justify that concretely.

    Province rulers get power from the human life of the province.
    Law rulers get power from people`s belief in their political authority.
    Temple rulers get power from people`s belief in their god.
    Guilders get power from people`s belief in the economic system.

    This breaks down for source holders, who get power not from people, but
    from the natural life of the province. They`re closer thematically to
    province rulers than to law, temple, or guilders I guess.
    --
    Communication is possible only between equals.
    Daniel McSorley- mcsorley@cis.ohio-state.edu

    ************************************************** **************************
    The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
    Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
    To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
    with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.
    NOTE: Messages posted by Birthright-L are automatically inserted posts originating from the mailing list linked to the forum.

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    474
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    On Tue, 2002-12-03 at 06:16, daniel mcsorley wrote:
    > On Mon, 2 Dec 2002, Peter Lubke wrote:
    > > > So I`m trying to reconcile 3e`s free-for-all multiclassing with the 2e
    > > > notion that certain classes get regency from certain holdings.
    > >
    > > It`s not a 2e notion - it`s a BR notion. That`s a huge distinction. It
    > > would be most incorrect to state that "in 2e this happened..." when in
    > > actuality it is nothing of the sort.
    >
    > I think it was a 2e thing, though. In that version, character concept was
    > extremely closely tied to class.
    Agreed - a matter of style which is not in vogue, but not without it`s
    good points.

    With free multiclassing, that`s no
    > longer the case- this gets taken to its extreme in d20 modern, where
    > classes are made as transparent as possible and the character concept is
    > what matters.
    >
    > When, in 2e, they needed to assign regent roles to characters, they did it
    > by class, but that`s not really necessary, and it wasn`t completely
    > well-done in the first place.

    Agreed (perhaps). (unless) Do you mean that regents shouldn`t have
    roles?, or that the roles shouldn`t be assigned by character class?

    >
    > The mapping of the (sneaking, trap-finding, back-stabbing rogue) to guild
    > holdings was so loose that they just went ahead and created a new Guilder
    > class in the Havens book. The tying of warrior-types to aristocratic
    > heirarchies of law holdings was similarly poorly defined, and I`m not sure
    > it was real-world justifiable in the first place. Most kings were not
    > good personal combatants, and the ones that were (Richard the Lionheart)
    > are often remembered as poor kings. Those that could do both were rare.

    Agreed - although they didn`t tie warrior types to realm/law very well
    at all

    >
    > I know /why/ it was done, to create four types of holdings which
    > corresponded to the four overall character types, and which could coexist
    > in one area in a way paralleling the teamwork of adventuring parties.
    > I`m just not sure it was a good enough reason.

    Disagree. I think that it is a good idea to create specialist regents.
    If all regents are basically the same, there will be much less `give and
    take`, and much less actual diplomacy. Diplomacy will become little more
    than a threat-based event, because of the one-winner syndrome. Win/Win
    situations become not possible - there`s always going to be a downside
    for someone. i.e. Always a winner and a loser in any negotiation.

    However, this is more a matter of personal preference/style - a minor
    issue on which it`s easy to agree to disagree.

    >
    > So, in 3e, with prestige type classes, I think we get a chance to break
    > that coupling entirely, from `adventurer class` to `domain type`.

    Agreed, it`s a good idea. But not that the implementation *needs*
    prestige classes to work or not though. OTOH, I`m not saying you can`t
    do it using prestige classes either.

    > I`m not
    > even convinced you should need divine spellcasting to rule a temple-
    > however, the presence of miraculous casting in D&D is enough to sway me on
    > this point. The head of a temple should be capable of spells if he wants
    > RP for the temple. Otherwise he just gets money.

    Agreed. I`d go even further and say that the head of a faith/set of
    temple holdings need not be a priest to cast realm spells - there are
    enough priests within the organization for this already. e.g. The Queen
    of England is not a priest, but is the head of the Church of England.
    And why not collect RP too - the prestige is only truly useful within
    the organization.

    >
    > > > I think the prestige/advanced class mechanic provides a good answer here.
    > > > I`m going to use 4 prestige classes that solve the problem for me, and
    > > > give a couple of other good features, too. They`re similar to the d20
    > > > modern advanced classes in that their prereqs are rather low- many
    > > > characters could go into them after first level in a regular class.
    > > >
    > > > Default: All characters gaing full regency from provinces in their realm.
    > > > No RP is gained from any other holding the character controls.
    > > > Additionally, by default all actions can only be domain actions- realm
    > > > actions, affecting multiple holdings, are available only at prestige
    > > > levels.
    > >
    > > Daniels solution suffers only one major drawback (and one minor), as it
    > > solves (a), (B), but not © above. (A character which `inherits` a
    > > domain - other than a realm - may be unprepared to collect regency in an
    > > efficient manner. Of course it could be argued that this would be a poor
    > > choice of heir for the previous regent to make, however it`s a more
    > > restrictive choice than previously.
    >
    > Not much more restrictive. Before, a temple regent had to leave her
    > holdings to another blooded cleric for it to be fully utilized.

    Actually, that`s untrue. An heir can inherit a bloodline and domain even
    if the heir is unblooded. In fact most heirs do inherit the bloodline of
    the donor (extinguishing any prior bloodline). A blooded heir has little
    advantage over a blooded heir for the purposes of inheriting a domain.
    (of course their usefulness as lieutenants is not germane to the
    discussion here)

    I`d argue that it is very much more restrictive. However, as we both
    point out - a judicious selection of candidates for heir avoids the
    issue. This is a bit of a fudge though - a requirement for convenience
    sake.

    [As a side point: I don`t really like the `designated heir` as a
    primary/single method of succession. I think the incumbent such have
    some say, but except for source networks, the organization itself should
    more commonly decide on the `heir`.]

    > The
    > prestige class way just requires a slight bit more forethought, that you
    > should groom a potential heir into one of these classes ahead of time (the
    > requirement is just `blooded scion`, not being a regent, so it`s not hard
    > to work that far ahead.) In fact, in a good sized temple like the WIT
    > (for example), you`d probably have a bishop every couple of provinces who
    > had at least one level in the Templar class, for redundancy or ambition`s
    > sake.

    >
    > > In fact (B) is only partially solved as well - characters who wish to
    > > add holdings of a different type to their base class may gain no
    > > benefit from them.)
    >
    > They get money, which is often the main reason for going into another type
    > of holding. If they want RP, I think they should have to work harder.
    Agreed - in principle. And I think this was the issue that the BR
    designers were trying to address when they restricted RP collection in
    the first place. Game balance and interaction between regents of
    different holding types (although not necessarily cooperation or
    contention).

    The comment that reflects the practical strategy of a BR regent player,
    rather than the ideal. Rules which dictate strategy are, IMO, less
    desirable than those that allow a more open-ended game, where a
    player/regent can determine their own `success` criteria.

    Actually the main type of "holding" that players try to add is a
    province (unless they already have some) - which always adds RP under
    the original rules (and your proposal if I understand it correctly).

    If they do have provinces, they try to add guilds - and trade routes.
    (for the GB as you correctly point out)

    [for the purpose of argument above - "holding" is defined as any asset
    held by a regent that may potentially generate RP.]

    >
    > > In effect he has created not four but five classes as `realm-ruler` is
    > > given to all by default. It has the elegance of allowing a character to
    > > rule any type of domain efficiently regardless of character class.
    > >
    > > The minor drawback is that he still hasn`t answered the original
    > > question (2) above. He`s just changed the `names` of the classes
    > > involved. It could be argued that it`s a `slip-in-under-the-table`
    > > argument for `collect from all` but we`ll make all a little more
    > > difficult. As such it`s tainted with the `not the intention of BR`
    > > argument.
    >
    > I`m not trying to just rename the classes, I`m trying to divorce regency
    > collection from adventuring. So yes, they`re different classes, but a
    > law-regent isn`t much like a fighter at all. Neither is a guilder much
    > like a rogue, nor does a templar have to be a powerful priest to guide his
    > flock. They`re specialized in their administrative field.
    *sniff* smells like a rose, looks like a rose ---- so you tinkered a
    little, but didn`t change the essential nature of things. Renamed and
    modified - how`s that?

    Again, though: What`s your answer to point (2) ?
    i.e.
    How many classes can you collect regency for ? (cumulatively)

    The implication is:
    "As many base/pre classes as you take"

    >
    > > My solution for 2e: (which of course works for 3e as well - but it`s
    > > much simpler as is less likely to appeal to those who like more
    > > convoluted systems)
    > > (1.1) `Regent class` not `character class` determines RP collection.
    > > (1.2) There are five(5) regent classes; realm, faith, guild, govern, and
    > > magic --- similar to what Daniel proposes
    > > (1.3) `Realm` regents collect RP for provinces, `Guild` regents collect
    > > RP for guilds/trade, etc etc --- Daniels classes have more complex
    > > collection rules, but are not dissimilar
    > > (1.4) A regent can have many `regent classes`. There is no cost, no
    > > penalty or restriction whatsoever. ---
    > > (1.5) But, a regent may only collect RP for one of his/her regent
    > > classes at his/her choice - but duh! - usually the one that yields the
    > > highest RP --- this final piece is an answer to (2), as well as (a),
    > > (B), and ©
    >
    > If your realm and governing classes are disjoint, then one cannot gain RP
    > from both provinces and law at the same time.
    Yes, correct. And this is a huge step forward allowing a much greater
    diversity of government types than before. e.g. You can have a ruler of
    a realm/province who is little more than a puppet - with the law holder
    pulling the strings - although it should be noted that, for any single
    province - the province ruler will always have at least as much power
    than the law holder. There are many benefits to this.

    But, you did this yourself too.

    > That was a pretty sizeable
    > benefit under the original rules, that anyone who ruled a province got RP
    > for it no matter what else they were.
    Yes, that was so. All the original play-testers had realms - regardless
    of their character class. And, as long as all regents have realms - they
    are *more or less* in the game. As you probably know from actual games,
    the first priority of a non-realm regent is to gain a realm. (or ally
    temporarily with a realm regent hoping to stab him in the back later and
    take his realm)

    > I think this was intentional- the
    > land and beliefs of people in Cerilia are powerful and simple enough that
    > simply lording over them gives you power.
    Yes, and how did I change that?

    > Drawing power from something
    > less substantial, like the beliefs of people in an economic system, or the
    > rule of law, or awe towards another entity (a god), or flowing tides of
    > mebghail, was more difficult and so available to fewer regents.
    A temple, guild, or law holding will always generate less than or
    equivalent RP than the province in which it sits, and these holdings
    generally have to be built up at great cost. (*You dare to insinuate
    that the Grand Wizard Zzekhiel is not a match for a puny Vizier?*) ---
    just kidding on the last.

    But not `fewer` regents surely? Isn`t it more likely that there would be
    more non-realm regents than realm regents? While the hearts and minds of
    the populace of a province can (in their majority) only be given to one
    regent - they can easily be divided in their loyalties to temples. Also
    the struggle for economic or magical dominance should be a *struggle*.
    While all regents seek to have some influence in the interplay of
    government - a regent controlling a province(4) with a law(4) as well is
    quite a dictator, which is fine in some cases but should not be seen as
    the `normal` situation IMO.

    >
    > Also, it looks like a fighter could collect full regency from temples or
    > sources under this method, and that doesn`t sound right to me. He should
    > have to demonstrate some magical ability.
    (see comments re: temple/faiths above)
    But, yes - a fighter/warrior type could control and gain RP from many
    sources. Such will do him very little good however, as sources
    themselves aren`t good for much except casting spells. Consider that a
    ranger type however, dedicated to the preservation of wilderness/natural
    surrounds/magic potential, might have some interest in the endeavor.
    (not that I`d suggest it`s a game winning strategy)

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

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    474
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    On Tue, 2002-12-03 at 10:53, daniel mcsorley wrote:
    > On Mon, 2 Dec 2002, Ryan B. Caveney wrote:
    > > > I`m not even convinced you should need divine spellcasting to rule a
    > > > temple- however, the presence of miraculous casting in D&D is enough
    > > > to sway me on this point.
    > >
    > > And RW religious figures, from Sumerian priests to medieval Popes to
    > > modern televangelists, convince me that being perceived as the provider of
    > > divine guidance is a source of immense political power. I`d suggest at
    > > least half RP for non-spellcaster temple regents.
    >
    > Thing is, I don`t think temple regents get RP for their political power.
    > I think they get it for their religious power- political power is
    > represented by law holdings. Sumerian priests and medieval Popes, if run
    > in BR, would have been big law and province regents, and I think you`re
    > mixing that in with their religious power because real-world historically,
    > there`s no difference. (Televangelists would be guilders, I suppose.)
    >
    > In a game with miraculous divine spellcasting, though, I think religious
    > power deserves to be counted separately from economic power and political
    > power. We have no historical parallel here, though, so it`s hard for me
    > to justify that concretely.

    I agree with Daniel. `Regency` can be derived from many sources (not
    meant to be a pun) - and the `regency` you get from temples is
    fundamentally different from other forms (hence the various forms). The
    mechanism of RP representing all the forms of `regency` is an
    abstraction, allowing us to treat RP more or less the same regardless of
    its origin.

    >
    > Province rulers get power from the human life of the province.
    > Law rulers get power from people`s belief in their political authority.
    > Temple rulers get power from people`s belief in their god.
    > Guilders get power from people`s belief in the economic system.
    >
    > This breaks down for source holders, who get power not from people, but
    > from the natural life of the province. They`re closer thematically to
    > province rulers than to law, temple, or guilders I guess.

    Here, you`re trying to get too specific (to tie it to people and
    belief). There`s no need to do so. It doesn`t really break down in any
    case as regency from sources can not readily be used in quite the same
    manner due to the restriction on source actions. (i.e. more or less the
    same)

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

  8. #8
    Site Moderator kgauck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Springfield Mo
    Posts
    3,562
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "daniel mcsorley" <mcsorley@CIS.OHIO-STATE.EDU>
    Sent: Monday, December 02, 2002 5:53 PM


    > Thing is, I don`t think temple regents get RP for their political power.
    > I think they get it for their religious power- political power is
    > represented by law holdings. Sumerian priests and medieval Popes, if run
    > in BR, would have been big law and province regents, and I think you`re
    > mixing that in with their religious power because real-world historically,
    > there`s no difference. (Televangelists would be guilders, I suppose.)

    I will hesitantly suggest that Ryan may have been identifying that the
    ideological source of political power of the temples is different from the
    political power of markets, courts, or fortresses. Even if he wasn`t, I`ll
    elaborate anyway. :-)

    The ideological power of the temple comes from providing meaning, norms, and
    ritual, but can then be applied to any political sphere, often on the basis
    of advancing the norms of the religion. The televangelist does not get a
    free espionage action, nor a free trade action, or any other action
    associated with a guilder. The televangelist does not collect RP from trade
    routes. The televangelist does get a free agitate action in which to
    denounce pornographers, abortionists, godless liberals, music, movies, the
    internet, D&D, and anything else that crosses his or her mind.

    Ideological power then, is a source of broadly applicable and widely
    distributed power to effect the activities of the whole province. Since the
    templar can control the way people understand their world, identify the way
    people ought to properly interact, and gain the prestige of spellcraft and
    ritual, they can excercise a great deal of latitude in the application of
    their power.

    I don`t think that Ryan meant that the power of the templars was political
    in the sense that he meant it was bounded territorially (by the state`s
    formal lines of authority), nor that it is drawn from the operations of the
    local or provincial operation of the state. My reading was that this use of
    political power was that "RP`s can have a game effect beyond the temple
    holding or the realm spell".

    > In a game with miraculous divine spellcasting, though, I think religious
    > power deserves to be counted separately from economic power and political
    > power. We have no historical parallel here, though, so it`s hard for me
    > to justify that concretely.

    And beyond the effect of realm spells?

    > Province rulers get power from the human life of the province.
    > Law rulers get power from people`s belief in their political authority.
    > Temple rulers get power from people`s belief in their god.
    > Guilders get power from people`s belief in the economic system.

    Actually, I think province rulers get power from the excercise of military
    power. They defend the province and have the power to wield a very big
    stick. The provincial ruler can easily undertake muster actions. He can
    also bar others from raising units if he wishes.

    Guilders get respect that follows from great wealth and the actual
    satisfaction of their material needs and wants through economic processes.

    Kenneth Gauck
    kgauck@mchsi.com

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

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    BR mailing list
    Posts
    1,562
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    We have had this discussion before.

    For the record - I still beleive class-resticted RP collection is a good
    idea.

    /Carl


    __________________________________________________ ___
    Gratis e-mail resten av livet på www.yahoo.se/mail
    Busenkelt!

    ************************************************** **************************
    The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
    Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
    To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
    with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.
    NOTE: Messages posted by Birthright-L are automatically inserted posts originating from the mailing list linked to the forum.

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    474
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    On Tue, 2002-12-03 at 07:42, Ryan B. Caveney wrote:
    > On Mon, 2 Dec 2002, daniel mcsorley wrote:
    >
    > > When, in 2e, they needed to assign regent roles to characters, they
    > > did it by class, but that`s not really necessary, and it wasn`t
    > > completely well-done in the first place.
    >
    > Agreed. It was necessary in so far as they wished to avoid creating
    > additional classes -- but now that we have several NPC classes, and
    > prestige classes are a dime a dozen, it is no longer so.

    3e character class is more about character abilities and character
    design/development rather than the more traditional `defining of
    direction/attitude`. (which creates issues for such classes as paladins
    as discussed recently - which are inherently attitude-focused)

    A primary question to my mind at least is whether regent roles are
    necessary, or desirable or neither. I would argue that they are
    desirable at the least.

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

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
BIRTHRIGHT, DUNGEONS & DRAGONS, D&D, the BIRTHRIGHT logo, and the D&D logo are trademarks owned by Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and are used by permission. ©2002-2010 Wizards of the Coast, Inc.