Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 33
  1. #21
    Site Moderator geeman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    2,165
    Downloads
    4
    Uploads
    0
    At 12:06 PM 1/10/2003 +0100, irdeggman wrote:

    >I generally find the at the Player`s Secrets are totally inconsistent
    >with the "core rules", by "core rules" I mean the BRRB, Atlas of
    >Cerialia (also inconsistancies between these two), the Tribes of the
    >Heartless Wastes, Ruins of Empire, Havens of the Great Bay, Cities in the
    >Sun, Rjurik Highlands, BoP, and BoM - one could even include the BoR.

    The PS texts often have some glaring inconsistencies with the rest of the
    published materials, but they aren`t totally inconsistent. If you can get
    past the contradictions they do contain some good stuff. Many of the
    extrapolations on elven culture in PSoTuarhieval, for instance, is just
    fine. One has to overlook the weirdness of a human invested with the
    domain, but that`s pretty easily discounted since it follows along with the
    alternate scenarios used to put PCs in place of the NPCs regents originally
    presented--none of which strike me as being particularly well
    done. Similarly, the Baruk Azhik book has some cool descriptions of
    dwarven life, good maps and adventure ideas. Lots of people hate the fact
    that dwarves can eat rock and dirt as presented in that book (I kind of
    like it myself) or that Grimm Graybeard turns into some sort of Obi Wan
    Kenobi of the caverns, but again either of those things can be discounted
    pretty easily.

    >The underlying theme in these is that humans and elves, with very few
    >exceptions, "hate" each other.

    There`s animosity, but I don`t think it rises necessarily to the fever
    pitch of outright hatred in the same way that humans feel about other
    rivals. One of the things I prefer about BR over other settings is that
    the differences between the races are more clearly described (depending on
    how seriously one takes the biology of dwarves and such as presented in the
    materials) but the "morality" of the various cultures is much more
    gray. Elves are "protectors of the forests" but some of them kill
    indiscriminately in doing so. Goblins are "evil" but still function pretty
    well on the national level with their human neighbors. Things along those
    lines.

    The hatred that elves have for humans isn`t unjustified given their
    ideology and more than likely certain biological factors that provided the
    basis for that ideology. That hatred, however, is not necessarily more
    serious than their generalized sense of racial superiority over other
    species, and when it gets right down to it, they are superior. Immortal,
    capable of wielding more powerful magics, Cerilian elves have racial
    advantages that probably aren`t very well reflected by characters presented
    with ability score numbers and character levels. Sure, elves don`t much
    care for humans, but are humans much more than goblins or orogs to such
    creatures? They aren`t even dwarves, which at least have the good sense to
    keep their grotesque faces underground where they won`t offend the
    sensibilities of elves.

    >It is written that humans see half elves as changelings and they are
    >shunned and only fully accepted in elven societies.

    I don`t know if that`s necessarily because they are elven, though. It`s
    more of an expression of human bias and xenophobia than a connection to
    elven heritage. It`s not necessarily an unjustified bias either for a
    couple of reasons.

    One should first take into consideration the circumstances of a half-elf`s
    birth. There ARE changelings in Cerilia (from Bloodspawn--possibly the
    best supplemental text IMO) who do actually steal babies and replace them
    with horrific simulacra (not in the sense of the D&D spell.) The idea of
    giving birth to something not-human is pretty upsetting, even if it`s
    something as innocuous as a half-elf. The sidhe are in many ways
    associated with the horrors of the Shadow World and that`s largely because
    they really are more closely linked with that land of shadow and mystery.

    Second, a human female who overcame any racial issues to mate with an elf
    male would be more likely to accept such a child, but I`m afraid most
    half-elven children would probably not be so enunciated.... As indelicate
    as this is, humans are remarkably vulnerable to being charmed from the
    elvish POV and, well, if they happen to be sexy humans then all the
    better. The elvish take on magic is a factor here as well. Charming a
    human for reasons of seduction would likely be considered a heinous act in
    human society, but to an elf, whose use of magic is part of his very
    character, there isn`t much difference between being charming and charming
    someone. What`s for the human to get upset about anyway? They live such
    short lives. Even any possible off-spring will only be around for a
    century or two. No big deal. Many half-elven children would likely be the
    product of this kind of liaison. The sidhe are mystical creatures who are
    not above a little of the kind of mischief that makes for maternity. The
    attitude of humans for half-elves is likely the product of that rather than
    a hatred towards elves.

    It`s also important to note that half-elves are accepted in elven culture,
    despite their human heritage. Is it strange that "children of nature" as
    it is sometimes euphonized would be more accepted amongst elves who are
    themselves more directly children of nature? Probably not. But a blind
    hatred for humanity would certainly rub off on creatures who are themselves
    half-human if it were as strong as all that.

    Gary

    ************************************************** **************************
    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. #22
    Senior Member Beruin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    228
    Downloads
    4
    Uploads
    0
    Gary wrote:

    >>One should first take into consideration the circumstances of a half-elf`s
    birth.<<

    In addition to the circumstances you mentioned, there`s also the possibility that half-elves are the product of rape committed during times of war between elves and humans. The outlook of such an half-elf would probably be rather different from one born from a love relationship.

    I would also like to address the "`typical` demographic breakdown of
    the various populations in particular regions?"
    I think it is important that we differentiate between the total population of a particular region and the `subject population` in a particular realm. For example, if we assume that Dhoesone has a population of 93% human, 3% elven, 1% halfling, maybe 2% dwarven and 1% other, does this mean that the listed demi-human population accepts the Baroness of Dhoesone as their ruler, pays taxes etc? Or do they live in remote wilderness areas without any real connection to the Barony?

    In the latter case, that is if the demographic breakdown should describe the total population of a region, not the subject population of a realm, a category "monster" should perhaps be included. In effect, we would need two categories to describe the population of a region.

    Dhoesone might have a subject population of 95% human, 2% elven, 1% each of half-elven and halflings and 0.5 % each of dwarves and goblins. In this thinly settled realm the total population might be something like 75% human, 7% elven, 3% other demi-humans, 5% goblins and perhaps up to 10% monster (mostly other humanoids like orogs, gnolls and whatever else you use, but also a few clans of ogres, giants, etc)

    Christoph Tiemann

    ************************************************** **************************
    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 empire, long divided, must unite; long united, must divide. Thus it has ever been."
    - The Three Kingdoms, attributed to Luo Guanzhong, c.1330-c.1400

  3. #23
    Site Moderator geeman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    2,165
    Downloads
    4
    Uploads
    0
    At 04:13 AM 1/12/2003 +0100, Christoph Tiemann wrote:

    >In addition to the circumstances you mentioned, there`s also the
    >possibility that half-elves are the product of rape committed during times
    >of war between elves and humans. The outlook of such an half-elf would
    >probably be rather different from one born from a love relationship.

    I`d imagine so. If it were a particularly common occurrence, though, it
    wouldn`t do much to explain why half-elves are accepted in elven
    communities while shunned amongst humans.

    >I would also like to address the "`typical` demographic breakdown of
    >the various populations in particular regions?"
    >I think it is important that we differentiate between the total population
    >of a particular region and the `subject population` in a particular realm.
    >For example, if we assume that Dhoesone has a population of 93% human, 3%
    >elven, 1% halfling, maybe 2% dwarven and 1% other, does this mean that the
    >listed demi-human population accepts the Baroness of Dhoesone as their
    >ruler, pays taxes etc? Or do they live in remote wilderness areas without
    >any real connection to the Barony?
    >
    >In the latter case, that is if the demographic breakdown should describe
    >the total population of a region, not the subject population of a realm, a
    >category "monster" should perhaps be included. In effect, we would need
    >two categories to describe the population of a region.

    That`s an interesting point. Several people have gone with interpretations
    of the domain rules in which the population numbers represent not the
    actual population of a province but that amount of the population that is
    under the control/influence of the province ruler. There are merits and
    demerits to such an interpretation (just as there are good and bad aspects
    of the differing POV.) Personally, I like to think of the population
    levels as the actual numbers of typical, "civilized" and humanoid creatures
    in a province, with the potential source level of a province representing a
    similar number of natural and magical creatures that reside in the
    province. For example, if level 3 represents 10,000 individuals and level
    4 represents 15,000 individuals then a 3/4 province might have 10,000
    humans/elves/dwarves/etc., and a "natural" population of 15,000
    "non-civilized" creatures, including monsters and various creatures that
    exist in a sort of extended food chain. Within those populations the
    individuals would have some sort of typical spread of character levels or
    HD. In a population of 1,000 humans there would be 500 of 1st level, 250
    of 2nd level, 125 of 3rd, etc. "Natural" populations would just replace
    character levels with hit dice. ie. Of 1,000 creatures 500 would be 1HD
    creatures, 250 2HD creatures....

    The thing to do then is to differentiate between "civilized" and "natural"
    for the purpose of determining to which group different types of monster
    belong. I would suggest that probably the simplest way to differentiate
    them is by intelligence. Do they have above animal (or 3-4)
    intelligence? If we were being more particular then the ability to speak
    might be a better way of differentiating "civilized" from
    "natural" populations.

    Using a system like that we can get not only the typical spread of NPCs
    that exist in a province but also the number of monsters that might exist
    there. Individual creatures and exceptions will, of course, exist, but a
    set of guidelines like that above can give us more of a clue as to what it
    is that we`re talking about when we have a (3/4) province.

    Gary

    ************************************************** **************************
    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. #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    BR mailing list
    Posts
    1,538
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    I see the monster population of an area as a function of the source level of
    that area. In areas where there is a lot of source levels, there are a lot
    of monsters. In this way, wilderness regions actually have a higher monster
    population than human population.

    Of course, the monster population of a source-7 province is less than the
    human population of a level 7 province. Monster neen noor very little
    civilian population to form the basis of an economy. But IMC a source-7
    province can muster 7 units of monster "militia" - in every way superior to
    human militia, and sometimes as strong as an Undead Legion or such.

    I include ogres, gnolls and lizard men in the "monster" population, as well
    as primitve tribal groups of goblins and even humans or halflings. The
    important thing here is that these people are not a part of a civlized
    economy of land exploitation. Orogs and shadow world halflings are not
    monsters in this sense - IMC they live in the Shadow World and raid from
    there.

    Note that this leaves elven provinces with a sizeable population of
    monsters - just the way I like it.

    Also note that these monsters are generally very unorganized - colonizing
    such a province is unlikely to encounter any organized resistance, or
    fighting more than one such nit of monsters at a time. Only if there is some
    organizing force (usually an awishleighn) will these monsters muster for
    battle. But just knowing they are there will give the players a pause.

    Source holdings that are "wild" and unclaimed have more agressive monsters,
    while those held by source regents tent to be calmer and live more
    remotely - so land regents have a need for sourceholders to keep their
    monster populations calm.


    __________________________________________________ ___
    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.

  5. #25
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    limerick, ireland
    Posts
    30
    Downloads
    5
    Uploads
    0
    i see the population as those included as members of the state,weather they want to or not. take dhoesone for example , some of the elven populations their might for the most part remain apart from human society with only a handfull of rangers and possibly the realms rulers knowing much about them ,yet they would still be counted amongst the populace. equally a pacified goblin tribe which openly resides in an area might be counted.
    at the same time there could be elves who completley shun contact with all outsiders and are for the most part uncounted as would meny monsters,hidden dwarf halls or humanoid camps.
    human brigands ,pirates would not be counted or in some places nomadic tribes.

    i cant really see a scribe going into a bandit camp and saying " excuse me terribly blackbeard, but im doing a population census and we wanted to know whow many cuthroats,rapists and thieves dwell hear and could you give me an ethnic brakedown of that number"
    Satanta

  6. #26
    Senior Member Beruin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    228
    Downloads
    4
    Uploads
    0
    Gary wrote:

    >>Several people have gone with interpretations
    of the domain rules in which the population numbers represent not the
    actual population of a province but that amount of the population that is
    under the control/influence of the province ruler.<<

    Well, I do not like this interpretation, as this implies that every province is in a sense already settled to the max. population possible and this strains my sense of logic.

    However, I`m really taken by the idea to associate monster population with source levels. I`m not yet sure if this method is viable in all cases. For example, it would produce an unsettled - by civilization plains province with an agreeable climate that would be only thinly populated by monsters, while an inhospitable mountain province would hold a very large monster population.

    In some cases, this perfect. I guess I will apply this ruling for the Spiderfell. It would really give Spidey something to work on.


    Would-be invaders beware!

    Christoph

    ************************************************** **************************
    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 empire, long divided, must unite; long united, must divide. Thus it has ever been."
    - The Three Kingdoms, attributed to Luo Guanzhong, c.1330-c.1400

  7. #27
    Site Moderator geeman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    2,165
    Downloads
    4
    Uploads
    0
    At 01:22 AM 1/13/2003 +0100, Christoph Tiemann wrote:

    > >>Several people have gone with interpretations
    >of the domain rules in which the population numbers represent not the
    >actual population of a province but that amount of the population that is
    >under the control/influence of the province ruler.<<
    >
    >Well, I do not like this interpretation, as this implies that every
    >province is in a sense already settled to the max. population possible and
    >this strains my sense of logic.

    Yeah, it`s not my favorite rationale either, but it does have certain
    strengths, mostly regarding the speed with which population levels can rise
    and fall given the Rule/Contest actions. The opposing position (that
    population levels represent the actual number of civilians in a province)
    means that one has to come up with some rationalization for so many people
    suddenly appearing in a province or disappearing when those provinces are
    ruled or contested.

    I`m starting to think there may be some sort of middle ground between the
    two positions in which populations would exist in various provinces up to a
    certain level, with another action required to raise the "potential
    population level" of a province after it is maxed out. The exact mechanics
    are something I`ll need to work out, but it`s something I`ve been mulling over.

    >However, I`m really taken by the idea to associate monster population with
    >source levels. I`m not yet sure if this method is viable in all cases. For
    >example, it would produce an unsettled - by civilization plains province
    >with an agreeable climate that would be only thinly populated by monsters,
    >while an inhospitable mountain province would hold a very large monster
    >population.
    >
    >In some cases, this perfect. I guess I will apply this ruling for the
    >Spiderfell. It would really give Spidey something to work on.

    One of the things I`ve been considering is redefining the source and
    potential source levels of a province to make them reflect this kind of
    thing. At present only source levels are related to the natural aspect of
    provinces (while three holdings are based on population level) and I`d like
    to expand that a bit by splitting sources up into two different types of
    holdings. Sources would still exist (for the purpose of arcane magic realm
    spells) and would work pretty much as they do now--representing the magical
    energy derived from the unspoiled aspect of a province--but there would
    also be a "wilderness" holding that represented something similar to the
    population levels but with, of course, animals, monsters, and various
    "natural" creatures taking the place of civilians. A holding like that
    would more aptly describe the kind of role that druids and rangers might
    have in a province without taking away the role of arcane magic for
    wizards/sorcerers.

    With a revised population level system the source/wilderness/potential
    source levels of a province might work the same way. ie. Sources and/or
    Wilderness holdings could be raised to a certain level based on the terrain
    type of the province and raised above that after another domain action
    increases that aspect of the province. The effort made to raise a province
    above that normally available for it`s terrain would represent more
    elaborate natural environments; most obviously a sylvan forest of an elven
    kingdom, but one could also imagine more elaborate natural environments,
    husbanded by various other types of creatures. Carefully manicured
    mountains of dwarven populations, protected and guarded lands of itinerant
    Rjurik. Things like that.

    Gary

    ************************************************** **************************
    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. #28
    Birthright Developer irdeggman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Virginia Beach, Virginia
    Posts
    3,945
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    How would you deferentiate between mountains and forests, which both have very high source levels but would definitely have different kinds of monster populations? Mountains generally have fewer, at least on the surface which is what affects the source level.
    Duane Eggert

  9. #29
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    BR mailing list
    Posts
    1,538
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Are you asking me? I don`t really care - these monsters are under DM
    control, and I am at liberty to do whatever I want with them. One war card
    per source level is just a general guideline.

    /Carl

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "irdeggman" <brnetboard@TUARHIEVEL.ORG>
    To: <BIRTHRIGHT-L@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM>
    Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 5:35 PM
    Subject: Re: Elven populations [2#1197]


    > This post was generated by the Birthright.net message forum.
    > You can view the entire thread at:
    http://www.birthright.net/read.php?TID=1197
    >
    > irdeggman wrote:
    > How would you deferentiate between mountains and forests, which both have
    very high source levels but would definitely have different kinds of monster
    populations? Mountains generally have fewer, at least on the surface which
    is what affects the source level.
    >
    >
    ************************************************** **************************
    > 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.
    >


    __________________________________________________ ___
    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. #30
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Canterbury, UK
    Posts
    10
    Downloads
    19
    Uploads
    0
    Hiya guys & ladies.:)

    Just struck with a 'little' thought.

    How about take the source potential of a province & substract the province level this will give you a number ranging from 9 to -5 (ish). Lump 0 & negatives together for the mo & take your nice positive integer as a guidline as to monster populations in an area.

    It makes sense to me that civilized areas will clear away creatures/people that they find disturbing or dangerous. Elves/Humans & Dwarves aren't likely to want hostile mountain Giants, manticores or other strange beasts in their living spaces so they will most likely have killed or chased any populations of such away.

    You can also have fun playing with the definition of what is a monster. In a human province, part of the 'monster' population may be elves. Whilst in an elven region I don't see them cutting down dryad trees whilst humans may be more prone to doing so (we can be nice. but logging interests often get in the way ;).

    Getting back to the 0 to negative numbers, GMs will always have wandering encounters. Whether they be social, human or monster. This means that there would be no established population of monsters in the province, but you might have a family of orogs moving to the surface for hunting & foraging for a short while. The Spider may have sent a group of his minions to get him strawberries in winter. Beware Avan's gardener...

    <warning, spin off thought>

    On a different topic, someone mentionned earlier that only surface features really affected the source potential of a province. I don't agree.
    How about caverns of wonder? I mean if the caverns of helm's deep held a dwarf in awe with their beauty, surely they'd make a great focus for a source.

    Of course we could always start allowing for subteranean provinces. The orogs must have a few. & the idea allows for some really cool variations on the dwarven realms. Mur Kilad with 4 provinces sounds much more impressive that with only two. Knowing the dwarves the surface provinces of their realms would probably only have ratings of 0, 1 or 2. Whilst their subteranean ones might reach the heady heights of 6 or even 8.

    I'm looking forward to what you people think.

    Be gentle.

    :P

    me
    me

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.