Bloodline

[Shade]

At 11:08 AM 3/15/2003 +0100, you wrote:
>From: "Lord Shade" <lordshade@SOFTHOME.NET>
>
>> In my campaign this factor will be balanced out by the fact that an 8th
>> level scion will have far fewer magic items than the D&D rules assume. IMO
>> this is mitigated to some extent by the presence of blood abilities.
>>
>
>You have a pointhere. Magical equipment is a very important part of the ECL
>calculation. Reducing the magic item budget by 50%, or even just limiting
>the available selection of magic items, so that characters have a few
>expensive ones without filling out all their available slots with low-power
>"+1" items like amulets of natural armor and rings of protection, reduces
>the ECL of a character significantly.
>
>Say a character of level 5 has the item budget of a second level character -
>I`d argue that the ECL of such a characer is 4 or maybe even less. Something
>like ECL = Character level *2/3 + "Budget level" * 1/3
>
>But by this token, blood abilities should be largely level-based, since
>magic item budget normally is. They could work somewhat the Ancestral Blades
>of OA (Yes, I know this has been suggested before). That way, the relative
>power of Birthright ECLs and other settings can be kept without introducing
>undue amounts of magical items. The question is, how does this fit with the
>idea of differing bloodline strengths and such?
>
>My experience from my own game is that many blood abilities become largely
>irrelevant at higher levels. We are now at level 15, and the most valuable
>blood abilities are those that enhance stats and saving throws - abilities
>like "elemental command" have become largely obsolete. If there is anything
>I`d change in my own bloodline system, it is that I would have those that
>grant unique abilities - like the aforementioned Elemental Control - would
>scale a lot more over levels.

Carl - I can understand WHY you would want to have the system scale over
levels. My problem is the original rules had bloodline completely
independent of level. A 1st level character with the right parents was
capable of awesome displays of power.

I kind of like that, and would like to see it preserved.

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

[geeman]

At 01:49 AM 3/15/2003 -0600, Lord Shade wrote:

>Were commoner PCs balanced against regent PCs in 2nd edition? You`ve got to
>be joking. A magic item (in a rare magic setting like BR) and a bloodline
>vs. 10% experience? Not even close!

Let me ask the converse of the question here. What`s the point in having
unbalanced characters?

>The game was obviously designed to favor regent and scion PCs. Hell, the
>entire reason my brother bought the BR boxed set was because he heard about
>the bloodlines and abilities somewhere. He didn`t give a damn about the
>political aspect (which is what I liked when I read through the books, and
>why I remain a fervent BR supporter).

I think bloodlines are a great innovation of the setting too. Why does
that mean that if one is using a system in which there are many functions
to reflect balance like 3e/D20 bloodlines should still be imbalanced?

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.

[geeman]

At 07:43 PM 3/14/2003 -0600, Mark VanderMeulen wrote:

>First of all, to those of you who remember me from before I fell off the
>face of the earth, I`d just like to say `hi` and `it`s nice to be back.`

Welcome back from the Shadow World, Mark. I trust you`re none the worse
for wear.

Look! ^^^ I still remember how to spell your last name--though I don`t
recall the M being capitalized all those years ago. (It`s the "eule"
that`s the tricky part anyway....)

For anyone who may not know M the VM is a BR old-timer. His appearance
always portends great doings and monumental adventures. No,
wait.... That`s Gandalf. My mistake.

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.

[ryancaveney]

Mark Vandermeulen wrote:

> First of all, to those of you who remember me from before I fell off the
> face of the earth, I`d just like to say `hi` and `it`s nice to be back.`

Hi, Mark! Welcome back. I remember you well. How`s the Shadow World?


On Fri, 14 Mar 2003, Atarikid wrote:

> Nice to some faces I remember from my time on the list. I dropped off the
> face of the world in summer 2000 myself.

I`ve taken six-month hiatuses from the list several times in my seven
years on it, but I always come back again. But Ken and Gary are *always*
here. =)

> When I hear domain level I don`t think of the Power Level of said
> domain, I think of the level of play that occurs on a domain wide
> scale.

I agree completely. "The domain level of play" is what I`ve always called
the BR rulership system, and the list has employed it as well as far back
as I can remember. I don`t know exactly why we do that, but it seems so
common there must be an official statement somewhere; I was just skimming
the BR rule book in search of it, but haven`t found it yet. However,
there *is* an official term for the power of a domain -- it`s called
Domain Power, and it`s the sum of all the levels (also called "ratings")
of provinces and holdings comprising a domain. It`s the maximum number of
RP that could possibly be gained by ruling that domain.

> You`re the first I`ve ever heard make an argument that Domain Level is a
> confusing term.

Agreed. Doesn`t confuse me at all. Then again, I`m used to
mathematicians, who use "normal" and "closed" to mean everything under the
sun -- I am used to dealing with things that are all four of open, closed,
neither open nor closed, and both open and closed all at the same time,
depending on which sort of mathematician you`re talking to.

> > So on the one hand, the Scion is MEANT to be unbalanced on the
> > domain level, because he has all the power and the commoner
> > doesn`t. Which is fine, that`s their shtick.

Exactly so!

> But Birthright is about the Domain Level play. It has been and always
> will be. That was the entire concept to the product line.

I wholeheartedly agree. That is becoming a theme. ;)

> If you leave out the domain play then why exactly do you game in Cerilia?

I wouldn`t go this far, though -- I can see Cerilia as a perfectly fine
place to run standard D&D adventures, just as Greyhawk would be a fine
place to run a Birthright campaign of domain rulership. To me, Cerilia
and Birthright are completely different things (though I admit I sometimes
mix my usage to conform to a post I`m replying to, largely because the
abbreviation "BR" is easier to type) -- to me, Birthright is the set of
rules that define the domain level of play and Cerilia is a campaign
setting; much like BattleSystem was a rules supplement and the big example
scenarios that came with it were drawn from the DragonLance adventure
campaign world (which is another setting crying out to be modeled in
Birthright rules). Cerilia just happens to be the only D&D campaign
setting published with the information needed to run a Birthright (that
is, *rulership*) game already included.

> I fail to see why it should take years to manifest powers. A Scion
> has the blood of dead gods coursing through him. [snip] You have
> divine essence ripping through you, manifesting powers.

Agreed! Bloodtheft is pretty much exactly what happens in Highlander when
one "Immortal" takes the head of another one. Spectacular bolts of
coruscating lightning arc between slayer, victim and the surrounding
landscape, transferring the personal power of the slain scion to his
killer in a sudden rush of energy. Any blood abilities gained can be
immediately used, exactly as the Book of Magecraft repeatedly says
happened "historically" whenever a major sielshegh gem was first acquired
by its wielder.

> I don`t like the idea of a regent having to waste feat slots on
> individual powers. While I personally dislike the blood as an ability
> score, I do not prefer the approach to make it a feat/skill based
> system. Why not leave it as it was? A totally seperate system?

That`s the way I want it, too. Keep it separate, with no cost at all in
XP, feats or any other RPG element. As always, I continue to maintain
that the BR domain rulership system is entirely independent of the
particular fantasy roleplaying game engine it sits atop -- in fact, there
needn`t be one at all! Just the domain level makes a perfectly fine
boardgame (I never go on adventures in the Sierra computer game, either).
The only real points of contact I see are in defining the mechanics of the
*effects* of blood powers in your favorite FRPG engine, who collects
regency from which holding (I am strongly tempted to say everyone collects
in full from everything, except only spellcasters can tap sources), and
who can cast which realm spells.


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.

[Trevyr]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Birthright Roleplaying Game Discussion
> [mailto:BIRTHRIGHT-L@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM]On Behalf Of Mourn

> I`ve been here since `01 and haven`t seen you before... so..
> welcome back! It`s always good to see a new(old) face on these
> boards. It makes discussions more lively.

Well, I was solely on the mailing list rather than the boards, and I dropped
off at least a year ago. Before the list and the boards were merged like
this, at any rate.

> I think your use of the word "level" here will add some
> confusion. I believe you are using it to refer to the scale of
> the game, whether you are running domain actions or if you are
> running a character in an adventure.

Good point. I will try to amend my usage to "domain scale" and "character
scale" (or realm scale and adventure scale) if it will ease communication.
Old habits die hard, however...

> I fail to see how making a successful coup de grace to commit
> bloodtheft (a check that nearly every character in the game can
> succeed at) becomes good roleplaying.

Well, because the character managed to get into the position to deal the
coup de grace in the first place. This should never be an easy thing, and if
it IS easy, there should tons of repercussions afterwards that compensates.
The social framework of the setting should see to it that premeditated
murder, even against an avowed enemy, is not legally permitted to occur
outside of certain thoroughly-delimited arenas, primarily war. The very act
of bloodtheft via coup de grace should be considered thoroughly vile,
dishonorable, and illegal outside of a battlefield (and possibly even there,
according to conservative theologists of Haelyn) because it indicates that
you committed violence against a helpless opponent. Now, granted that lands
outside of Anuire will dice shades of honor less finely, but there should
always be the threat of reprisals from family members and allies when we`re
talking about bloodtheft.

It has been my experience that most people exclude the role of the DM when
they are talking about game balance, as though balance were some objective
goal that could be built into a product before it is handed to the DM. I
would argue, however, that such perspective is doomed to failure by the very
nature of the game. The DM always has been and always will be an agent
either of balance or of unbalance. So it makes perfect sense to me to use
that agency to achieve balance when the available game-mechanical approaches
all seem unsatisfactory.

> And I fail to see how it is reasonable to grant one character
> abilities to justify up to a +3 level adjustment without
> balancing against the other players.

I don`t know that it is any more unbalancing that tossing one +3 longsword
into a party`s treasure. Only one party member is going to be able to use
that sword. Now, if the whole adventure had been designed around getting
that magical weapon for a fighter character, most PC`s would understand.
They know that their chance will come in the next adventure or two. So if a
certain focus of a campaign has been the struggle between a character and
her rival, and in a climactic battle that character kills her opponent and
gains a bloodline, most PC`s would feel glad for her, and immediatly turn
their attention to looting the rival`s palace. Granted, the players would
all expect equivalent reward for their own characters in due course, but
that`s just good DMing.

That, said, the +3 ECL does seem a bit steep, so perhaps the bloodtheft
rules need to be rewritten so that bloodlines gained through ursurpation do
not automatically start out at the Strength level of the victim. Perhaps
starting out as tainted (+0 ECL) for tainted and minor bloodline victims and
minor (+1 ECL) for major and great bloodline victims.

> Also, about suddenly dropping a bloodline on a character... the
> character shouldn`t instantly have a ton of blood abilities...
> spending your entire life without a shred of magical ability,
> then pooof you`re a scion, and you suddenly know how to use all
> these special abilities? I think not... a skills/feats system
> shows that even if you get the Bloodline through other means
> (investiture, bloodtheft), you must learn what you have.

This is certainly a valid point. I would certainly expect that it would take
a person a certain amount of time to figure out how to use their newfound
divine power effectively and reliably. I imagine that bloodpowers do not
develop until puberty, and that when they do, the exact powers that develop
have a lot to do with what the individual experiences (and tries to
accomplish) during puberty. This suggests that blood abilities shouldn`t be
acquired automatically upon ursurpation, but be developed over time. Perhaps
a recently-blooded character should be allowed to ATTEMPT to use any of the
blood powers open to their derivation, but require a bloodline ability check
to see whether it works, and starting out with very high DC`s (perhaps 18 or
20). Then, once a use has succeeded, the DC is reduced. Over repeated uses,
the DC drops until it can be used as normal, and the slot is considered
"filled."

It may also make sense to use an XP-expenditure system similar to creating
magical items. An XP-cost could be settled on for minor, major, and great
powers, and the player would have to spend the XP in order to purchase the
power, and would be similarly limited by the time it takes to develop a
power. One per adventure seems about right to me, but as that`s an amorphous
time frame, perhaps one per fortnight or one per month.

> This system also allows characters that want to focus on being a
> scion to really focus on it, by spending their available skills
> and feats on these blood powers. If the scion wants to be a
> better fighter, then he`d focus more on his fighting prowess.
>
> I`ll draw a comparison to the Wishsong of Shannara (great book).
> Brin Ohmsford has the wishsong, a powerful singing ability that
> allows her to reshape reality through magic, which is inherent in
> her blood. However, she actually has to learn to control this
> ability or she can`t really even use it. So both Brin and a
> scion have innate potential (shown in my example system as a feat
> which grants you a Bloodline score), but both have to learn to
> control and use their abilities (shown in my system to be the
> bloodline skills and feats).

Well, I can certainly see your logic, although I might argue that your
approach takes things too far in the other direction: making explicit--and
difficult--to achieve something that was orginally (in 2eBR) implicit and
easy. I don`t really have a problem with making things explicit, but making
characters spend levels on a scion class seems unreasonably expensive.

Mark V.

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

[ryancaveney]

On Sat, 15 Mar 2003, Lord Shade wrote:

> There is a lot of stuff in 3e that is totally broken. Divine Power is
> one (hmm, I`m a cleric, you`re a fighter.. but I can fight better than
> you, fire arrows better than you, and cast heal, holy word, miracle,
> summon monster IX, and reached Harm on top of that)

Oh yeah! Clerics are insanely powerful. IMG, I have combined ALL
spellcasting into a single class, with wizard, bard, sorcerer, cleric,
druid and magician differing from each other only about as much as
specialist wizards from different schools differ (i.e., the biggest
difference is just the list of allowed spells). Bloodline is a much more
important distinguishing characteristic. Then I convert all "pure"
clerics found in game supplements into multiclassed Ftr/Clr or Clr/Rog.

> > A 10th-level scion and a 10th-level commoner should be of the same
> > power level,
>
> I respectfully disagree.

Indeed, they *can`t* be, because character level is not the only important
part of game power. Ability scores and magic items in particular must be
factored into any calculation of relative power, even (in fact especially)
between two characters with identical class levels.

> Most games *should* have a commoner or two in the mix? Again I
> respectfully disagree. The PCs are heroes, and don`t necessarily fall
> into the same demographic rules as the NPC population, IMHO.

Agreed. PCs throw demographics straight out the window. That said, a few
allied regents and their unblooded lieutenants make for a fine BR-style
gaming group -- but no better a one than The High King, To Each His
Throne, or the other suggestions in the back of the BR rulebook. Though
as my previous post implied, I think Common Heroes is not BR, but rather
D&D in Cerilia; but that`s splitting hairs.

> I agree that balance is needed. But charging +4 character levels for
> even a true bloodline is ridiculous.

Here`s where I make my pitch for the distinction I see between good ways
and bad ways to use CR and ECL. IMO, *charging* for blood powers, racial
abilities, or anything else is always ridiculous, except perhaps at the
very instant of character creation. Assuming that classes were actually
balanced against each other (which as you so rightly note in another
post, is not remotely the case with standard 3e ones), a character with
21,000 XP should always have exactly seven class levels, regardless of
whether its base type is unblooded human, Sidhe with True bloodline, or
Cerilian Dragon with a fiendish template. Yes, go ahead and calculate
effective levels for these things (and ability scores and magic items,
too!) in order to determine the appropriate Challenge Rating for a given
encounter, but once XP awards are determined from that, let all creatures
spend XP in exactly the same way. My opinion is grounded in this one
guiding principle: being more powerful doesn`t make you a slower learner.
I understand why the ECL rule was introduced into 3e, but I don`t think it
actually accomplishes what it`s supposed to, and it has this pernicious
side effect of not only overpunishing the powerful, but also doing it in a
totally nonsensical manner.

> In My Humble Opinion a 10th level scion should be stronger than a 10th
> level commoner. Having the blood of the gods flowing through him
> should make him stronger.

Absolutely yes. Also a Sidhe who never sleeps or ages or leaves tracks or
gets sick and has low-light vision and resists charming and magical
disease and ignores terrain when moving is obviously more powerful than a
human with the same number of class levels. This means in calculating the
CR of an encounter with one, the ECL of race and bloodline and other
things should be added in -- but IMO it makes no sense for it to mean that
facing the same challenge (whether it be 10 vs. 10 or 14 vs. 14) doesn`t
result in the same growth in class level.

> > Also, by pushing scions above their power level without any sort of
> > balance leaves terrible holes in the Challenge Rating and XP
> > system. So, if I`m a 6th-level scion of a major bloodline, according
> > to the [NB: suggested draft!] rules I`m an ECL of 8. So, if we square
> > off against CR 8 creatures, I am fighting against my challenge rating.

With this, I do agree. However, I equally strongly feel that upon gaining
just 7,000 XP from these "fair" encounters -- not 9,000 -- you should
become a 7th-level character, for whom encounters should be constructed as
if you were 9th level. The current system is a double penalty (or worse,
from a spellcaster`s POV), and as this poster notes Lord Shade`s
suggestion is a penalty in the other direction: I`m trying to split the
difference with something that just makes more inherent sense to me.


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.

[ryancaveney]

On Sat, 15 Mar 2003, Lord Shade wrote:

> Okay, so by that stick, I take it that you consider a 10th level commoner
> to be about as strong as a 10th level fighter? How about a 20th level
> commoner versus a Ftr4/Wiz1/Rog3/Bladesinger10/Bladedancer2? How does a
> 20th level warrior stack up to a Wizard5/Incantatrix10/Archmage5? They
> do have the same amount of experience poin`ts, after all.

Which means they *shouldn`t* have the same number of XP, or the classes
should be rewritten. 3e *claims* to be better balanced, but it sure
doesn`t look that way in practice to me either.

> > Again, an argument to break the system, and ruin its sense of logic
> > and consistency for no better reason than "just because."

The system *claims* to be more logical and consistent. It actually isn`t.

> My point is that even in 3rd edition, this doesn`t hold true.

Agreed!

> Clerics are stronger than just about any other class if built
> properly. It`s sick, really. At least 2e didn`t have this problem.

Here I part ways, but only because I think clerics have *always* been
overpowered, ever since the invention of the game. I do agree that 3e has
made this problem even worse, though.


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.

[ConjurerDragon]

Mark VanderMeulen wrote:

>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Birthright Roleplaying Game Discussion
>>[mailto:BIRTHRIGHT-L@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM]On Behalf Of Mourn
>>
>This is certainly a valid point. I would certainly expect that it would take
>a person a certain amount of time to figure out how to use their newfound
>divine power effectively and reliably. I imagine that bloodpowers do not
>develop until puberty, and that when they do, the exact powers that develop
>have a lot to do with what the individual experiences (and tries to
>accomplish) during puberty. This suggests that blood abilities shouldn`t be
>acquired automatically upon ursurpation, but be developed over time. Perhaps
>a recently-blooded character should be allowed to ATTEMPT to use any of the
>blood powers open to their derivation, but require a bloodline ability check
>to see whether it works, and starting out with very high DC`s (perhaps 18 or
>20). Then, once a use has succeeded, the DC is reduced. Over repeated uses,
>the DC drops until it can be used as normal, and the slot is considered
>"filled."
>
Wouldn´t that be a perfect use for the new Knowledge (Bloodlore) skill?

>It may also make sense to use an XP-expenditure system similar to creating
>magical items. An XP-cost could be settled on for minor, major, and great
>powers, and the player would have to spend the XP in order to purchase the
>power, and would be similarly limited by the time it takes to develop a
>power. One per adventure seems about right to me, but as that`s an amorphous
>time frame, perhaps one per fortnight or one per month.
>
YES :-)
e.g. CHARACTER READING, a major ability is comparable to a Medaillon of
Thoughts from the DMG. The Medaillon costs 480 XP (1/25th of 12000 gp).
Character Reading requires a major bloodline and thus in the 3E draft
requires an ECL for the Major Scion Template - and this will cost him
much more in his life than 480 XP and 12000 gp.
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.

[Trevyr]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Birthright Roleplaying Game Discussion
> [mailto:BIRTHRIGHT-L@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM]On Behalf Of Lord Shade

> >A 10th-level scion and a 10th-level commoner should be of the same power
> level,
>
> I respectfully disagree.

Well, then you are starting to loose sight of what a level means, aren`t
you? Levels are meant to indicate the rough power level of the individual
(whether they actually succeed in that is another question). Of course, I
assume that the intention of the comparison was "A 10th-level blooded
character and a 10th-level unblooded character" rather than referring to the
"Commoner" NPC-class, which after all was designed to be less powerful than
PC classes. I would agree that a 10th level blooded fighter should be
(roughly) as powerful on the adventure scale as a 10th level unblooded
fighter, and I think that the ECLs as they were designed (or with minor
tweaking) do that admirably.

> I have never met a player who didn`t want to be a scion. For a lot of
> players, that`s the whole point of playing BR :)

I certainly have. Both because they thought it would be interesting to rp,
and because they were new to 3e and didn`t want to have to worry about
bloodline scores and abilities on top of everthing else. For starting
characters, the need to divide your available ability points between seven
rather than six abilities has also served as a deterent to some. Although I
don`t remember if that is as central to the BRCS as it was to the earlier
document...

Mark V.

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

[kgauck]

Mark and Ryan write:

> > I don`t like the idea of a regent having to waste feat slots on
> > individual powers.
>
> That`s the way I want it, too. Keep it separate, with no cost at all in
> XP, feats or any other RPG element.

Just because you can describe blood powers as feats doesn`t mean you have to
use up normal feat slots to get them. Especially if one is favorable to the
ECL adjustments for blooded characters, blooded characters could get bonus
feats for blooded characters. Fighters get bonus combat feats, wizards get
bonus metamagic and item creation feats, why not give blooded characters a
starting bonus of blooded feats. Then, if blooded characters want to take
additional blooded feats by spending character level feats, I don`t have a
problem with that.

Since going over to the ECL system, I`ve given tainted characters 3 hp
(Toughness), a +1 to a derivation skill (Anduiras` skill is Knowledge (Law))
which is also a class skill, a +1 bonus to a derivation save (Anduiras` save
is Willpower).
Minor characters get 6 hp, a +2 skill bonus, a +1 save bonus, a bonus
blooded fleet, and a +1 ECL modifier. Major characters get 9 hp, a +3 skill
bonus, a +2 save bonus, two bonus blooded feats, and a +1 ECL modifier.
Great characters get 12 hp, a +4 skill bonus, a +2 save bonus, three blooded
feats, and a +2 ECl modifier.

A character like Varri Haraldsson, king of Stjordvik, have a minor
bloodline, get one bonus blooded feat, and then have taken an additional
blooded feat along the way, giving him Blood History and Detect Illusion.

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.