Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 42

Thread: Ruler levels

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    BR mailing list
    Posts
    1,562
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    In the original ruleset, character ruleset didn`t really affect one`s
    talent as a regent. It was more domain power, and occasionally a couple
    of proficiencies were used, but most of those could be picked up within a
    couple of levels.

    3e uses the skill point system, so if you tie any portion of the domain
    system to a skill (administration or strategy), high level characters will
    be significantly better. Is that good? Or should a 3e version of domain
    rules allow 1st level kings to be just as effective as 20th level kings?
    --
    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
    Birthright Developer Raesene Andu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    South Australia
    Posts
    1,357
    Downloads
    1
    Uploads
    0
    Originally posted by Birthright-L
    3e uses the skill point system, so if you tie any portion of the domain
    system to a skill (administration or strategy), high level characters will
    be significantly better. Is that good? Or should a 3e version of domain
    rules allow 1st level kings to be just as effective as 20th level kings?
    A very interesting question. I don't like to answer yet as the d20 rules aren't available to everyone yet, but this is one question that will be hotly depated once they are released.

    As a related question let me ask you this. If certain skills/feats were required to be a more effective ruler (e.g. administration and strategy) would you spend the points to gain levels in these skills or would you continue to focus on combat, magic, or stealth related skills and feats?

    In other words, which would be more important, a powerful, harder to kill character, or a character that could rule his realm more effectivly?
    Let me claim your Birthright!!

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    474
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    On Thu, 2003-01-30 at 14:41, daniel mcsorley wrote:

    In the original ruleset, character ruleset didn`t really affect one`s
    talent as a regent. It was more domain power, and occasionally a couple
    of proficiencies were used, but most of those could be picked up within a
    couple of levels.

    3e uses the skill point system, so if you tie any portion of the domain
    system to a skill (administration or strategy), high level characters will
    be significantly better. Is that good? Or should a 3e version of domain
    rules allow 1st level kings to be just as effective as 20th level kings?
    --

    1st level kings should be as effective (if not more effective) than 20th
    level kings.

    ************************************************** **************************
    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. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    474
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    On Thu, 2003-01-30 at 14:41, daniel mcsorley wrote:

    In the original ruleset, character ruleset didn`t really affect one`s
    talent as a regent. It was more domain power, and occasionally a couple
    of proficiencies were used, but most of those could be picked up within a
    couple of levels.

    3e uses the skill point system, so if you tie any portion of the domain
    system to a skill (administration or strategy), high level characters will
    be significantly better. Is that good? Or should a 3e version of domain
    rules allow 1st level kings to be just as effective as 20th level kings?
    --

    1st level kings should be as effective (if not more effective) than 20th
    level kings.

    ************************************************** **************************
    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. #5
    Birthright Developer Raesene Andu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    South Australia
    Posts
    1,357
    Downloads
    1
    Uploads
    0
    Originally posted by Peter Lubke
    1st level kings should be as effective (if not more effective) than 20th
    level kings.
    Interesting opinion. Care to explains your reason as to why?
    Let me claim your Birthright!!

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    BR mailing list
    Posts
    1,562
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Prestige Class: Monarch??? Sounds good to me. The more a person learns
    about being a Monarch, the better they would be at it. There are already
    Warlord and such prestige classes, I think this one would be a good one.
    Others could be: Guilder, High Priest, Realm Mage, etc.

    I like Prestige Classes because they give such variety, and you can just
    make them up!



    ----Original Message Follows----
    From: Peter Lubke <peterlubke@OPTUSNET.COM.AU>

    1st level kings should be as effective (if not more effective) than 20th
    level kings.

    __________________________________________________ _______________
    Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8.
    http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

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

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    BR mailing list
    Posts
    1,562
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    On Thu, 30 Jan 2003, Raesene Andu wrote:
    > Originally posted by Peter Lubke
    > > 1st level kings should be as effective (if not more effective) than
    > > 20th level kings.
    >
    > Interesting opinion. Care to explains your reason as to why?

    Because D&D levels are directly tied to adventuring prowess, and
    adventuring has nothing to do with leadership/rulership ability. There`s
    been some effort in 3e to make classes (expert, commoner, aristocrat)
    which gain levels but have nothing to do with adventuring, but it`s still
    a rather bad tack-on to the D&D level system (what`s a 20th level commoner
    exactly? And how does he gain all that experience without adventuring,
    and if he did adventure, wouldn`t he be picking up some adventurer class
    levels?).
    --
    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.

  8. #8
    Birthright Developer Raesene Andu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    South Australia
    Posts
    1,357
    Downloads
    1
    Uploads
    0
    Originally posted by Birthright-L
    Because D&D levels are directly tied to adventuring prowess, and
    adventuring has nothing to do with leadership/rulership ability. There`s
    been some effort in 3e to make classes (expert, commoner, aristocrat)
    which gain levels but have nothing to do with adventuring, but it`s still
    a rather bad tack-on to the D&D level system (what`s a 20th level commoner
    exactly? And how does he gain all that experience without adventuring,
    and if he did adventure, wouldn`t he be picking up some adventurer class
    levels?).
    I'm not entirely convinced (although this was an argument I myself made under 2nd edition rules). With 3rd edition rules, the focus seems to be on skills etc, and that by increasing these skills you gain knowledge and are better at preforming that skill. This seems to me to be the reason for the introduction of the NPC classes (expert, commoner, etc) and thus a ruler in Birthright who focuses on BR related skills and gains more ranks in these skills as he gains in level would possess more knowledge and therefore be better at certain actions etc than a level 1 stay-at-home ruler who did nothing but lounge around his harem.
    Let me claim your Birthright!!

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    BR mailing list
    Posts
    1,562
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    On Thu, 30 Jan 2003, Raesene Andu wrote:
    > As a related question let me ask you this. If certain skills/feats
    > were required to be a more effective ruler (e.g. administration and
    > strategy) would you spend the points to gain levels in these skills or
    > would you continue to focus on combat, magic, or stealth related
    > skills and feats?
    >
    > In other words, which would be more important, a powerful, harder to
    > kill character, or a character that could rule his realm more
    > effectivly?

    Well, the point of BR was to play an adventuring king, so you`d want to be
    able to have some of both (probably wouldn`t be optimal at either, which
    is fine). The "adventuring->XP->levelling->more skillful" model doesn`t
    really work for a non-adventuring king, though, does it? And he should
    probably be a more skillful king than the adventuring king, since it`s his
    only focus. But he never gets XP, so he`ll never improve his skills, and
    the adventuring king will blow by him. Adding XP rewards for kingly
    duties is kind of a hack and doesn`t exactly solve the problem either.

    What`s really needed, rather than an `expert` class which mysteriously
    gains XP and pours all his growth into skill points, is a more direct way
    to add skills, probably by spending time practicing them.
    --
    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.

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    474
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    On Thu, 2003-01-30 at 15:44, Raesene Andu wrote:

    This post was generated by the Birthright.net message forum.
    You can view the entire thread at: http://www.birthright.net/read.php?TID=1241

    Raesene Andu wrote:
    Originally posted by Peter Lubke
    1st level kings should be as effective (if not more effective) than 20th
    level kings.
    Interesting opinion. Care to explains your reason as to why?


    Character class should be relatively unimportant to rulership ability.
    Character class level is therefore even less so. De-coupling character
    class from domain activity provides a far more flexible system - and one
    which is easier to manage as well. To some extent this is seen in BR by
    "any regent can collect RP/DP from provinces" - character class is
    unimportant.

    A character that spends much of his time gaining level in his character
    class is not spending it on his/her domain. Therefore the higher the
    character class level of regent, the less experienced and effective they
    will be as regent. While D&Ds XP systems do allow a character to reach a
    level and then just stay there -- such is not likely in actuality, you
    must continually use your skills even to maintain them at their peak.
    And some skills will deteriorate as a character ages no matter how hard
    they try to hold on to them.

    BR (2e) chained character class to a predisposition to rule certain
    kinds of domains. But they did it extremely poorly. Warriors were given
    a very poor deal even though the expectation was that warriors would
    rule most realms - in fact they hold the majority of the realms in
    Anuire despite the fact that they are less well suited to do so by 2e BR
    rules than other classes.

    The introduction of a regent class with levels of increasing ability (a
    common 3e theme) therein detracts from core BR -- or would have to be an
    alternative to bloodlines and RP. Bloodline and RP are already a
    mechanism for dealing with regents and their effectiveness. It`s not
    perfect and could be improved - but no need to throw the baby out with
    the bathwater just yet. (However such a scheme could be an alternative
    to bloodline and RP)

    Even in non-BR D&D, character class level should not equate with rank
    within an organization. A high level character may be well-respected,
    and even given honorary positions within the organization but the more
    they spend adventuring, the less political clout they`ll have. This is a
    common theme in many fantasy novels. The notion that a 9th level priest
    is the high priest should be dismissed -- more likely that the high
    priest will be 3rd or 4th level, not totally inexperienced but having
    been more active in politics and administration. They will have
    authority over far more powerful (by character level) priests.

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