# Thread: bloodline creation (was Regent classes)

1. On Wed, 4 Dec 2002, daniel mcsorley wrote:

> Whoa, you just boggled my mind there. That`s a very interesting use
> of the land`s choice rule.

Thanks. =)

> Quibbles: Bloodlines boundary conditions were poorly defined.

Good point.

> bloodline 0 (because you can have a bloodline less than 1, but round
> fractions down),

In my first version of this rule, what I said was that every sentient
creature had some tiny spark of divinity (which predates Deismaar, but
anyway) -- every member of any PC species has some bloodline, even if one
as small as one-billionth of the power represented by Bloodline Score 1;
but this would never be noticed until such a person became a regent.

> Also, isn`t there a rule that you can only invest RP into your bloodline
> once per domain turn? I think I remember that.

Indeed there is. One point per domain turn is also possible, if slightly
less pretty mathematically. I like formulae with aesthetic appeal.

What I first came up used this; say you had a bloodline of 0.001, or
roughly 2^-10. If you have a holding of even one level, you`d get
max(bloodline, domain power) per turn, so in two domain turns you`d have
2^-9 RP saved up. The only thing you could do with this small an amount
of RP is to spend them on increasing your bloodline to 2^-9; thus you`d
have a bloodline of 1 after 20 turns. In practice the only thing to keep
track of is to roll some dice (d4 or 3d20 or whatever you like) and say
that after that many DT, you got a bloodline of 1. The trouble is, that`s
way too slow to keep a new regent from getting utterly squashed.

> Second turn, he gets bloodline 1. Third turn, bloodline 2. This could
> only continue as long as there`s uncollected RP around to raise his
> bloodline in one turn, it shouldn`t bank. So his best bloodline he could
> get `free` like this would be half his domain power.

This also seems reasonable. The reason I like multiple-point increases
each turn is to scale the amount of growth to the power of the domain
inherited, so that the effect of inheriting an 80-point domain versus a
40-point one is not just to keep the same slow growth going on twice as
long, but rather to have growth happen faster (e.g., 2 turns instead of 5
to bloodline 16). This both fits my picture of how such a thing ought to
feel (instant rush of power then a rapidly slowing increase, rather than a
steady progression all the way through) and helps such regents survive
long enough to have a chance to manage their domains in the long term.
If we kept multi-point increases but dropped banking them between turns,
then they`d stop at half-strength but still grow quickly for a time and
then level off to linear, reaching their full "free" score in a number of
domain turns equal to half that score; there also wouldn`t be any turns in
which there was no present increase but would be a future one. I think I
might like this better.

Ryan Caveney

************************************************** **************************
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.

2. On Thu, 2002-12-05 at 11:51, Ryan B. Caveney wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Dec 2002, daniel mcsorley wrote:
>
> > Whoa, you just boggled my mind there. That`s a very interesting use
> > of the land`s choice rule.
>
> Thanks. =)
>
> > Quibbles: Bloodlines boundary conditions were poorly defined.
>
> Good point.
>
> > bloodline 0 (because you can have a bloodline less than 1, but round
> > fractions down),
>
> In my first version of this rule, what I said was that every sentient
> creature had some tiny spark of divinity (which predates Deismaar, but
> anyway) -- every member of any PC species has some bloodline, even if one
> as small as one-billionth of the power represented by Bloodline Score 1;
> but this would never be noticed until such a person became a regent.
>
> > Also, isn`t there a rule that you can only invest RP into your bloodline
> > once per domain turn? I think I remember that.
>
> Indeed there is. One point per domain turn is also possible, if slightly
> less pretty mathematically. I like formulae with aesthetic appeal.
>
> What I first came up used this; say you had a bloodline of 0.001, or
> roughly 2^-10. If you have a holding of even one level, you`d get
> max(bloodline, domain power) per turn, so in two domain turns you`d have
> 2^-9 RP saved up. The only thing you could do with this small an amount
> of RP is to spend them on increasing your bloodline to 2^-9; thus you`d
> have a bloodline of 1 after 20 turns. In practice the only thing to keep
> track of is to roll some dice (d4 or 3d20 or whatever you like) and say
> that after that many DT, you got a bloodline of 1. The trouble is, that`s
> way too slow to keep a new regent from getting utterly squashed.

RP = max(DP, BP)
avoids all this.

A blooded character starting from scratch has RP = BP.
A non-blooded character gaining control of a domain (but not a
bloodline) has RP = DP.

Except of course a non-blooded character trying to build a domain from
scratch will move pretty slowly.

Gain of BP is a roll against
prob% = max((DP-BP),0)/(DP)

i.e. You only gain BP if your DP value exceeds your BP

>
> > Second turn, he gets bloodline 1. Third turn, bloodline 2. This could
> > only continue as long as there`s uncollected RP around to raise his
> > bloodline in one turn, it shouldn`t bank. So his best bloodline he could
> > get `free` like this would be half his domain power.
>
> This also seems reasonable. The reason I like multiple-point increases
> each turn is to scale the amount of growth to the power of the domain
> inherited, so that the effect of inheriting an 80-point domain versus a
> 40-point one is not just to keep the same slow growth going on twice as
> long, but rather to have growth happen faster (e.g., 2 turns instead of 5
> to bloodline 16). This both fits my picture of how such a thing ought to
> feel (instant rush of power then a rapidly slowing increase, rather than a
> steady progression all the way through) and helps such regents survive
> long enough to have a chance to manage their domains in the long term.
> If we kept multi-point increases but dropped banking them between turns,
> then they`d stop at half-strength but still grow quickly for a time and
> then level off to linear, reaching their full "free" score in a number of
> domain turns equal to half that score; there also wouldn`t be any turns in
> which there was no present increase but would be a future one. I think I
> might like this better.
>
>
> Ryan Caveney
>
> ************************************************** **************************
> 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. On Thu, 5 Dec 2002, Peter Lubke wrote:

> RP = max(DP, BP) avoids all this.

So it does. And it makes it much easier for newly-starting regents to
defend their first few holdings. I just can`t see that it makes much
sense -- what is your metaphysical explanation for what`s "really"
happening? The specter of hundreds of blooded scions without any domains
at all building up thousands of RPs also disturbs me greatly. If your
rule really is `if DP > 0, then RP = max(DP, BP); else RP = 0`, that
problem disappears, but what is the in-game fantasy physics mechanism
used to explain the caveat?

Ryan Caveney

************************************************** **************************
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.

4. On Fri, 2002-12-06 at 12:48, Ryan B. Caveney wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Dec 2002, Peter Lubke wrote:
>
> > RP = max(DP, BP) avoids all this.
>
> So it does. And it makes it much easier for newly-starting regents to
> defend their first few holdings. I just can`t see that it makes much
> sense -- what is your metaphysical explanation for what`s "really"
> happening? The specter of hundreds of blooded scions without any domains
> at all building up thousands of RPs also disturbs me greatly. If your
> rule really is `if DP > 0, then RP = max(DP, BP); else RP = 0`, that
> problem disappears, but what is the in-game fantasy physics mechanism
> used to explain the caveat?

Oh, I never allow regency to accumulate. You can`t have `more` regency
because you didn`t exercise your regency in the last few months. How can
one be `more regal` for having done nothing?

No blooded character, with or without a domain, can store regency (and
hence accumulate the game mechanic measurement of it - RP). To gain more
regency you must either
(i) create a domain that exceeds your inherent bloodline potential --
thus proving yourself worthy for a bloodline increase as well
(ii) increase your bloodline through bloodtheft or other magical means

As for the metaphysical `reason`:

A characters `personal power` comes from their bloodline alone. These
persons were born to rule. Some have greater power than others. They
have an advantage in creating a domain over those with less bloodline.

A domain has organizational power, and the head of that organization is
respected as a powerful person - i.e. the regency tranfers to the
person. Some men are born to greatness, others have it thrust upon them.

Even so, having been `made` powerful - a character will begin to have
personal power in any case. Call it self-belief or whatever you will.

e.g. We could posit a realm where the ruler is elected - a republic.
While a character with a bloodline might be seen as being a better
choice (born to rule), he could be an arrogant SOB that alienates the
people - perhaps after a term in office, perhaps even before.

An unblooded character might be seen by the people as a better choice.
(Not to be confused with the land`s choice). On assuming the mantle of
Protector of Greenfell, this character will slowly become blooded as
well.

Say Greenlock generates 20 points of Domain Power. The character will
have 20 RP per turn to play with - it can never accumulate, and in order
to generate more - he`ll have to build the domain up.

In the meantime, he may gain bloodline - the longer he stays in office
and the better he does the more bloodline he will gain.

Turn 1. The protector has a (20-0)/20 = 100% chance of gaining a
bloodline point
Turn 2. The chance is (20-1)/20 = 95% chance.
etc....

So the previous Protector will have some personal power after he leaves
office, reflecting the status of being an ex-Protector. It`s unlikely to
be as high as 20 BP of course, and you wouldn`t want that.

************************************************** **************************
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.

5. On Fri, 6 Dec 2002, Peter Lubke wrote:

> Oh, I never allow regency to accumulate. You can`t have `more` regency
> because you didn`t exercise your regency in the last few months. How
> can one be `more regal` for having done nothing?

Ah, OK then. I would view regency accumulation as akin to doing favors,
but not calling them in until a later date. Similarly, I like the ability
to mechanic negotiations like "OK, I`ll do this really big thing for you,
but then you have to leave me alone for a while" vs. asking for something
minor all the time. Showing restraint in the demands placed on
subordinates is one part of sustainable leadership. Still, I can see your
side (as well as Kenneth`s half-life idea), and it does prevent the
excessive accumulation problem I feared.

> A characters `personal power` comes from their bloodline alone. These
> persons were born to rule. Some have greater power than others. They
> have an advantage in creating a domain over those with less bloodline.
>
> A domain has organizational power, and the head of that organization is
> respected as a powerful person - i.e. the regency tranfers to the
> person. Some men are born to greatness, others have it thrust upon them.

You begin to win me over. =)

> Say Greenlock generates 20 points of Domain Power. The character will
> have 20 RP per turn to play with - it can never accumulate, and in
> order to generate more - he`ll have to build the domain up.

I wonder if this means your campaign has more frequent but smaller RP
bidding wars than most others -- use it or lose it means you may as well
toss whatever you`ve got into any resolution die roll.

One other nice thing it does is explain the endurance of powerful
Awnsheghlien with tiny realms, like Rhuobhe and the Spider -- 11 (or 0!)
RP per domain turn means that on the wargame level, they ought to be easy
pickings for their neighbors; but with 80 RP per turn and only a couple of
holdings to defend, they need never really fear Contest actions and can
maintain a sizable army without much of a GB income. Looks good.

I know you`ve made this suggestion before without convincing me, but now I
might be coming around to your way of thinking. The one thematic aspect
missing which I might like to see restored from the original rules is the
problem of having inherited an office that is too much for you, and having
a difficult time living up to it until you have somehow proven yourself.

> In the meantime, he may gain bloodline - the longer he stays in office
> and the better he does the more bloodline he will gain.

Where "the better he does" is defined by how many points of domain power
he adds to the realm, yes?

> So the previous Protector will have some personal power after he leaves
> office, reflecting the status of being an ex-Protector.

Yes, good. And if he retires to become mayor of a small town, ruling only
a couple points of law holdings, his prestige and consequent authority
will exceed that normally paid a regent of so small a domain. Fine. If
nothing else, I think this system does a rather good job of modeling the
senatorial families of republican Rome....

> It`s unlikely to be as high as 20 BP of course,

Expectation is that it would hit 20 on domain turn 72, after 18 years as
Protector. Not at all unreasonable.

Ryan Caveney

************************************************** **************************
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.

6. Question - since everyone is blooded, does that mean anyone can become a wizard?

7. On Sat, 2002-12-07 at 07:27, Ryan B. Caveney wrote:
> On Fri, 6 Dec 2002, Peter Lubke wrote:
>
> > Oh, I never allow regency to accumulate. You can`t have `more` regency
> > because you didn`t exercise your regency in the last few months. How
> > can one be `more regal` for having done nothing?
>
> Ah, OK then. I would view regency accumulation as akin to doing favors,
> but not calling them in until a later date. Similarly, I like the ability
> to mechanic negotiations like "OK, I`ll do this really big thing for you,
> but then you have to leave me alone for a while" vs. asking for something
> minor all the time. Showing restraint in the demands placed on
> subordinates is one part of sustainable leadership. Still, I can see your
> side (as well as Kenneth`s half-life idea), and it does prevent the
> excessive accumulation problem I feared.

Kenneth`s half-life is just a longer period in which the points
dissipate.

I see the RP as a mechanic for representing `regency` in a spendable
form -- how much you can regency you can exercise per domain turn. A
characters `regency power` will be the value that he collected in RP at
the start of the turn, not how much he/she has left. To save it (even a
fraction) means that your regency `value/status/whatever` can fluctuate
more than what I would call a regents `best value` (full RP). But hey,
that`s just my opinion.

There are two arguments to the "What have you done for me lately?"
question. Both have valid points of view.
(i) If you didn`t spend RP in a previous turn - then you haven`t done
much lately - and hence are seen as less influential. (OTOH: How lately
is lately? -- it`s just a line in the sand)
(ii) If you didn`t spend RP in a previous turn then you are still "owed"
some favors -- even if much later in the future (OTOH: Can you "rely" on
this? -- ?!sigh!?)

> > A characters `personal power` comes from their bloodline alone. These
> > persons were born to rule. Some have greater power than others. They
> > have an advantage in creating a domain over those with less bloodline.
> >
> > A domain has organizational power, and the head of that organization is
> > respected as a powerful person - i.e. the regency tranfers to the
> > person. Some men are born to greatness, others have it thrust upon them.
>
> You begin to win me over. =)
>
> > Say Greenlock generates 20 points of Domain Power. The character will
> > have 20 RP per turn to play with - it can never accumulate, and in
> > order to generate more - he`ll have to build the domain up.
>
> I wonder if this means your campaign has more frequent but smaller RP
> bidding wars than most others -- use it or lose it means you may as well
> toss whatever you`ve got into any resolution die roll.

Well, ... usually a players regent has one or perhaps two actions that
h/she *really* wants to get through. Now depending on your initiative
and whether you "hold" your action .. a player can try to "go last" or
"go first" ... or more usually, "go last" on the second last action and
"go first" on the last -- getting two actions in a row. So, mostly,
there`s no real bidding wars in the first half. In the last action round
- all hell can break loose. Of course you can always try to pull a bluff
and attempt your important action first -- hoping everyone else lays off
and doesn`t counter-attack later when you have no RP left.

>
> One other nice thing it does is explain the endurance of powerful
> Awnsheghlien with tiny realms, like Rhuobhe and the Spider -- 11 (or 0!)
> RP per domain turn means that on the wargame level, they ought to be easy
> pickings for their neighbors; but with 80 RP per turn and only a couple of
> holdings to defend, they need never really fear Contest actions and can
> maintain a sizable army without much of a GB income. Looks good.
>
> I know you`ve made this suggestion before without convincing me, but now I
> might be coming around to your way of thinking. The one thematic aspect
> missing which I might like to see restored from the original rules is the
> problem of having inherited an office that is too much for you, and having
> a difficult time living up to it until you have somehow proven yourself.

Yes, well - if you don`t have a bloodline higher than your domain power
- any sniping at your domain will reduce your RP per turn. So if you
can`t defend it with what you`ve got -- then you end up getting weaker.

A regent like el-Hadid has more DP than BP, (IMC it`s about 35 to 17) so
any loss to his holdings is a loss of RP that`s harder to replace - he
has to build up DP again. Whereas a character with the reverse ratio
will not be affected by the loss - and will have more resources to
recoup with.

Initiative: rather than use character level for initiative
bonus/penalty, I use (BP-DP)/5 which means that characters with a domain
larger than their bloodline will be a little less able to gain
initiative. It`s not much of an advantage -- except when regents like
Darien Avan and Caliedhe Dosiere clash!! hee hee (that old silver fox
can`t be outmaneuvered by that young whippersnapper any day soon)

************************************************** **************************
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. On Fri, 6 Dec 2002, irdeggman wrote:

> Question - since everyone is blooded, does that mean anyone can
> become a wizard?

Is this referring to my "every sentient creature is at least
infinitesimally blooded" idea? If so, I would say no -- there is a
threshold of bloodedness necessary to be able to wield magic successfully.
There need be no change from the existing rules if that threshold is set
at one point. I am tempted to say that much as the relevant ability score
sets the highest level of spell that can be cast, so should the full
bloodline score -- perhaps set the maximum allowed spell level to
one-fourth or one-fifth of the bloodline (people with tainted bloodlines
in the 1 to 3 or 1 to 4 point range would be allowed 0-level spells only).

Ryan Caveney

************************************************** **************************
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. So a wizard has 2 relevent ability scores to worry about - Intelligence and the bloodline? On the surface this seems to be too restrictive for potential wizards, fighters don't have to worry about having their basic class abilities limited because they have a minor bloodline so neither should a wizard. Just my opinion.

The original rule was that the character just had to be blooded, no specification on strength.

10. On Thu, 2002-12-12 at 08:14, irdeggman wrote:

> This post was generated by the Birthright.net message forum.
>
> irdeggman wrote:
> So a wizard has 2 relevent ability scores to worry about - Intelligence and the bloodline? On the surface this seems to be too restrictive for potential wizards, fighters don`t have to worry about having their basic class abilities limited because they have a minor bloodline so neither should a wizard. Just my opinion.
>
> The original rule was that the character just had to be blooded, no specification on strength.

While we can argue what the theoretical attitudes of the peoples of
Cerilia are to wizards -- and we can also to-and-fro the attitudes of
players of fantasy games, I think it`s a given that fantasy games are
around at least in part so that players can play a wizard. Without
wizards there would be historical role-playing etc etc. (in fact that`s
exactly how it started)

But in Cerilia -- source wizards are rare. Couple of dozen on the
continent - isn`t that what it says? A couple of dozen! Ignoring the
attitude of the Vos and the Rjurik, ignore even if you will the
Anuireans - and ignore the elves - ignore even the Brecht. How rare in a
magic-friendly society like the Khinasi are source wizards? -- I think
you`d agree that even if all the source wizards in Cerilia (couple of
dozen) were all Khinasi, then source wizards would still be rare in
Khinasi.

Aha! you pounce, but not all wizards control sources. This is true, so
let`s think about it. Which wizards do control sources? What
qualifications do you need? Why would a character want to? Why would
he/she not want to? Seeing the very personal nature of wizardry in
general wouldn`t it be reasonable to say that, in general, the more
powerful wizards control the sources? So what of the other wizards - is
their potential limited? - is their future limited? how many are there?
Unlike faiths which would attract blooded priests like moths to a flame
in the hope of eventually becoming high priest (or whatever) - there is
no such thing for wizards.

So if any wizard has the potential to become a powerful source caster -
if they can become a powerful wizard - then why are then there so few?
And now to speculation, supposition and less concrete notions. What if a
wizard not only has to be blooded to cast true magic, the degree to
which they are blooded determines how powerful they may become - e.g.
tainted bloodlines can cast only 1st and 2nd level spells or some such.
While the character may rise and rise in levels, they may be unable to
access higher level spells. Thus only strongly blooded characters may
stick with wizardry for any time - others may quickly reach the limit of
their potential.

From a player perspective, none of this becomes a problem. After all, if
a player wants to be a powerful wizard, any reasonable DM should allow
him/her the resources to potentially achieve the dream.

--- just idle thoughts --

************************************************** **************************
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.

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