Chapter 2 - Blood Abilities

[ConjurerDragon]

Kenneth Gauck wrote:

>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Michael Romes" <Archmage@T-ONLINE.DE>
>Sent: Monday, February 17, 2003 10:37 AM
>
>>Because PC´s tend to ignore the Bloodmarks of other players to
>>do what they want to do. I don´t know many players, who would
>>get exalted to meet someone with "extremely red hair" or "steel-gray
>>eyes" and suddenly drop their plans and become much more
>>friendly... ;-)
>>
>That`s an explanation for why Bloodmarks are useless, but those characters
>with the red hair or the gray eyes aren`t crippled.
>
I assume the writer who stated that they are crippled felt that a
character having Bloodmark is at an disadvantage
compared to anohter character with an bloodability which is actually of
use in the game - not quite crippled, but
not balanced either.
bye
Michael Romes

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

[irdeggman]

Re; bloodmark, that is why the mechanical benefit is a +1 to charisma based skills. No matter how you cut it PCs are always immune to action influencing effects, that aren't charms that require saving throws. Always has been and pretty much always will be. Something about free will of the players to decide how their characters will react to circumstances.

While not as useful as other minor blood abilities, again not all feats are equal either. How many people think that the toughness or endurance feats are all that usefull as compared to say alertness or power attack? OK toughness can be useful if the character in question is a first level wizard with only 4 hitpoints, but overall it is pretty lame for a feat.

Again, the blood ability may not be as useful as others but it is not crippling.

[Shade]

At 05:26 PM 2/17/2003 +0100, you wrote:
>Lord Shade wrote:
>
>>>Battlewise: Useless as ever, but good description...
>>>
>>
>>?? I thought in 2nd edition Battlewise was by far the most powerful blood
>>ability, correct me if I`m missing something...
>>
>That totally depends on how often you go into a battle with an army.
>If you prefer to be the single adventurer, or the leader of a small
>party adventuring in dungeon, or enjoy social interaction...
>Then Battlewise is useless ;-)
>
>If however you are the Archduke of Boeruine and want to be the next
>emperor, then having such a bonus to your armys in the field is a great
>bonus...
>bye

Yeah, I always thought that was the great equalizer between Avanil and
Boeruine. On paper Avanil looks so much stronger (bigger army, more
vassals, better vassals, more money, more tribute, more territory, more
holdings, bigger bloodline, next to the City of Anuire, few serious enemies
nearby, etc) but Aeric Boeruine has battlewise. That alone in my mind was
enough to match Avan`s advantages.

Imagine if Ghoere had battlewise... gg thx for playing Roesone and Mhoried!

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

[Shade]

I generally considered Bloodmark to be the most minor of blood abilities,
and for a while let PCs take the ability for free if they wanted it.

I changed my mind when I realized that the +4 to reactions is definitely
valuable. The downside, of course, is that you have big problems trying to
disguise yourself (important for a thief or mage).

At 05:37 PM 2/17/2003 +0100, you wrote:
>Kenneth Gauck wrote:
>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: "Yair" <brnetboard@TUARHIEVEL.ORG>
>>Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2003 3:35 PM
>>
>>>Personally, I see bloodmark as pretty much useless (if not crippling) by
>>>itself, and hence a good candidtate for a prereq.
>>>
>>I`m curious. Why is bloodmark crippling?
>>Kenneth Gauck
>>kgauck@mchsi.com
>>
>Because PC´s tend to ignore the Bloodmarks of other players to do what
>they want to do.
>I don´t know many players, who would get exalted to meet someone with
>"extremely red hair" or "steel-gray eyes" and suddenly drop their plans
>and become much more friendly... ;-)
>bye
>Michael Romes
>
>************************************************* ***************************
>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.

[Shade]

> irdeggman wrote:
> Re; bloodmark, that is why the mechanical benefit is a +1 to charisma
based skills. No matter how you cut it PCs are always immune to action
influencing effects, that aren`t charms that require saving throws. Always
has been and pretty much always will be. Something about free will of the
players to decide how their characters will react to circumstances.
>
>While not as useful as other minor blood abilities, again not all feats
are equal either. How many people think that the toughness or endurance
feats are all that usefull as compared to say alertness or power attack?
OK toughness can be useful if the character in question is a first level
wizard with only 4 hitpoints, but overall it is pretty lame for a feat.

actually alertness is crap too ;)
Better to use something like, say, Improved Critical to make your point :)

But I get your point, and I agree.

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

[irdeggman]

I don't know, I've used Alertness quite frequently (+2 to Spot and Listen checks comes up quite frequently), almost as often as Improved Initiative.

[Shade]

At 04:20 AM 2/18/2003 +0100, you 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=1334
>
> irdeggman wrote:
> I don`t know, I`ve used Alertness quite frequently (+2 to Spot and
Listen checks comes up quite frequently), almost as often as Improved
Initiative.

Hmm, I could be wrong then :)

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

[ConjurerDragon]

Lord Shade wrote:

>At 05:26 PM 2/17/2003 +0100, you wrote:
>
>>Lord Shade wrote:
>>
>>...
>>If however you are the Archduke of Boeruine and want to be the next
>>emperor, then having such a bonus to your armys in the field is a great
>>bonus...
>>
>Yeah, I always thought that was the great equalizer between Avanil and
>Boeruine. On paper Avanil looks so much stronger (bigger army, more
>vassals, better vassals, more money, more tribute, more territory, more
>holdings, bigger bloodline, next to the City of Anuire, few serious enemies
>nearby, etc) but Aeric Boeruine has battlewise. That alone in my mind was
>enough to match Avan`s advantages.
>Imagine if Ghoere had battlewise... gg thx for playing Roesone and Mhoried!
>
Imagine if Ghoere could use the realmspell "Maintain Armies" to cheaply
maintain HUGE numbers of military units - in 3E every damn cleric can
cast it, while in 2E only priests of Avani could cast it... ::-( (And
clerics must be karthago! (ähm be specialists!)

Better Vassals? ;-)
Taeghas and Brosengae were on Boeruines side during Michale Roeles
ascension to the throne - they can change again sides. And as both are
constantly on the brink of civil war Avan can be kept busy by this alone
(if he has only Magician lieutenants and not good diplomats to send...)

Mieres could be cut off at any time the seadrake wishes and the governor
does not seem overly trustworthy. Something interesting that was brought
up in COG II: The temples of Eloele in Mieres (a vassal of Avan) could
easily be used to discredit Avan as next emperor - after all the Emperor
is the protector of Anuire, of which Haelyn is patron! And AVAN allows
the temples of the goddess of thiefs prosper in his vassals lands? ;-)
bye
Michael Romes

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

[ConjurerDragon]

Lord Shade wrote:

>I generally considered Bloodmark to be the most minor of blood abilities,
>and for a while let PCs take the ability for free if they wanted it.
>
>I changed my mind when I realized that the +4 to reactions is definitely
>valuable. The downside, of course, is that you have big problems trying to
>disguise yourself (important for a thief or mage).
>
Mage: "fifth level spell from 2E Book of Magecraft: disguise bloodline:
hids all magical and also physical (as appearance) aspects of a bloodline.

And a simple shave will hide the "Very red beard", a cheap cloak or wig
conceal the bright white hair...
No problem for imaginative mages and thiefs.
bye
Michael Romes

>At 05:37 PM 2/17/2003 +0100, you wrote:
>
>>Kenneth Gauck wrote:
>>
>>>----- Original Message -----
>>>From: "Yair" <brnetboard@TUARHIEVEL.ORG>
>>>Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2003 3:35 PM
>>>
>>>>Personally, I see bloodmark as pretty much useless (if not crippling) by
>>>>itself, and hence a good candidtate for a prereq.
>>>>
>>>I`m curious. Why is bloodmark crippling?
>>>Kenneth Gauck
>>>kgauck@mchsi.com
>>>
>>Because PC´s tend to ignore the Bloodmarks of other players to do what
>>they want to do.
>>I don´t know many players, who would get exalted to meet someone with
>>"extremely red hair" or "steel-gray eyes" and suddenly drop their plans
>>and become much more friendly... ;-)
>>bye
>>Michael Romes
>>
>>************************************************ ****************************
>>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.
>

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

[irdeggman]

Originally posted by Yair


Perhaps more importantly, a general note - it helps if you put a "behind the screen" section explaining our design decisions. Especially decisions that have to do with game balance. It retrospect, it seems obvious that a "prereq chain" implies the top-abilities are more powerful, but at first sight I didn't see it, and a behind the screen section would have helped.

Including such a section was actually discussed during the development but was dismissed as not really providing a good bang for the buck. None of the core rules really includes such a section, that is mostly left up to sage advice. It was basically decided that it would be best to answer specific questions rather that to include information that may not be very useful to people, i.e., we could have providing lengthy explanations of things that people didn't really have any questions on. I had actually prepared some FAQs that I thought would be useful, but really only one has come up so far - the reason for ECLs and scion templates. So why much up a process answering questiones that aren't being asked?:)