Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 56
  1. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Malden, MA
    Posts
    761
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    On Sun, 16 Mar 2003, Gary wrote:

    > Particularly things like Table 12: Blood Ability Acquisition on p22 of
    > the RB. That structure and progression of that table has always
    > mystified me.

    It`s a terrible table, I agree. Easily solved by Starfox`s method:
    "A character gets one point of bloodline abilities for every full five
    points of bloodline strength. Minor abilities cost one such point, major
    abilities cost two, and great abilities cost four points." This tends to
    give slightly more BAs than rolling on that table, but that doesn`t bother
    me at all, and anyway it can be easily tuned to taste by changing the
    conversion number (one point per seven or ten or three or...) and perhaps
    refined by making some majors better than others, etc.

    > thinking in particular of Blood History, which from I can tell could
    > give the effects of a vast number of intellect based skill ranks.

    Yes, and not just Int -- read loosely, Blood History could allow you to
    use every single skill and feat in the game at a decent rank, plus Bardic
    Knowledge. It needs to be limited somehow, perhaps with a BardKnow-like
    DC to test how likely it is that you can remember anything relevant to the
    immediate situation in a short time.

    > Character Reading also is a rather vaguely written and
    > poorly implemented 2e blood ability.

    In 3e it`s really easy: +10 to Sense Motive. That is one positive change
    in going to 3e mechanics, I agree. The skill system is better.

    > Other issues include things like bloodtheft. In all honesty, I`ve
    > been reading posts on the subject for years and I have yet to find a
    > system of doing bloodtheft that I thought really worked.

    Mine is really simple: "piercing through the heart" is purely a poetic
    phrase. Any killing of a scion where there is physical contact, including
    strangling them, clubbing them over the head or slaying them with a touch
    spell, permits bloodtheft. Touch spells delivered by Spectral Hand work
    too, since the hand is manifested from the caster`s own life force.
    Ranged attacks will generally cause return of the bloodline to the land,
    but if there is someone else in physical contact with the scion when they
    die, that third party is likely to gain the benefits of bloodtheft. If a
    whole group of people simultaneously kill a scion (e.g., the murder of
    Julius Caesar), each of them will get some blood benefit. Certain special
    situations have special rules: for example, the Disintegrate spell
    destroys the bloodline utterly, not allowing bloodtheft but also
    preventing transfer of stored RP to the heir; and killing a scion while in
    control of another person`s body by Magic Jar will cause the possessed
    body, not the possessing mind, to gain from the bloodtheft.

    > Another issue that I`d like to see better developed is the monetary
    > system at the domain level.

    OK, this is no longer about bloodlines. At present, I am content to say
    "the GB is whatever unit it needs to be to let the domain level work
    unchanged." I periodically change my mind about how best to connect it to
    the adventure level monetary system, but I don`t worry about it too much.

    > Large scale combat is probably something that could also be endlessly
    > refined, and I`d like to see a substantially more developed system.

    Now we`re really far afield. =)

    > but they retained a few things that I don`t much care for--like the
    > 3x5 battlefield map.

    Agreed. By far the biggest problem with the warcards is that stupid map.
    I am actually perfectly happy to use the warcards, just so long as they
    are spread out on a nice, big hex map with no stacking allowed. (I
    actually use 1/2" square cardboard counters on the map, with the warcards
    off to the side for reference, so that the battle can easily fit on a
    small table.) I still fiddle with a wide variety of alternate systems,
    but that one change removes most of my objection to the warcards.

    > OK, sure. "All other things being equal" characters with equal
    > character levels should also be equal in power.

    Right. I`m just saying that if you`re gonna bother to count the effect of
    blood abilities, which are generally on the minor magic item scale, you
    really need to count up the equality of *all* the other things before it
    starts to matter. Consider, for example, Heightened Ability: it should
    not induce any ECL at all unless *just one single point* of ability score
    difference due to *any* other reason also induces an ECL.


    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. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Copenhagen, Denmark
    Posts
    32
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    I am 100% with Shade on this one. I am basically satisfied with the "old box" bloodline system. At least, it is far better than the 7th ability score rules.

    I am not at all concerned about game balance. I don't need ECLs, CRs, or whatever to figure out how to DM a campaign that is challenging and exciting to my players.

    On the other hand, it is a convension in D&D to game balance everything. So, ECL adjustments might be the way to go. However, I do hope such game balancing rules will be highly contained and easily ignorable by those of us who don't like (or need) them.

    Just my thoughts...

  3. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Copenhagen, Denmark
    Posts
    32
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    > "A character gets one point of bloodline abilities for every full five
    > points of bloodline strength. Minor abilities cost one such point, major
    > abilities cost two, and great abilities cost four points."

    Well, if we are going to have a new bloodline system, I'll probably vote for this one. It's simple, consistent, to the point, and it allows plenty of room for the individual DM to adjust it as he sees fit.

  4. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    883
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    mhelles 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=1439
    >mhelles wrote:
    > I am 100% with Shade on this one. I am basically satisfied with the "old box" bloodline system. At least, it is far better than the 7th ability score rules.
    >I am not at all concerned about game balance. I don`t need ECLs, CRs, or whatever to figure out how to DM a campaign that is challenging and exciting to my players.
    >On the other hand, it is a convension in D&D to game balance everything. So, ECL adjustments might be the way to go. However, I do hope such game balancing rules will be highly contained and easily ignorable by those of us who don`t like (or need) them.
    >Just my thoughts...
    >
    The ECL´s for major or great scions do bother me.

    Not only do non-blooded characters LOSE their bonus to XP, now blooded
    characters get a penalty instead.

    While formerly Birthright characters had something in addition to the
    core rules, now the special bloodlines will replace the advantage of
    having one or more levels of classes which you will not have, because
    you have a bloodline.

    This disadvantage is not justified. The XP a scion loses over his career
    adds up to large amounts of XP while the powers scions gain do not add
    up to reflect this loss.

    When we need to balance characters then the XP loss of scions should
    reflect the gain.

    And the best for this, when the gained ability is static, is to pay a
    static amount of XP.

    In Tome&Blood are several Prestige Classes who receive a "virtual" brew
    potion feat to store spells in their blood (Blood Magus) or Sword (Spell
    Sword).

    A scion could during creation or when gaining a bloodline through
    bloodtheft or investiture simply gain a "virutal" magic item creation
    feat=Bloodline, which allows him to create magic items=blood abilitys
    for which he pays the XP and perhaps the gp (ritual cost?) from the DMG
    for the approbiate magical item.

    IF the XP losses and costs for magical items in 3E are balanced to
    reflect the posession of magical items vs. having more XP, then this
    will balance scions with bloodabilites against those without.
    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.

  5. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    317
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    >The simple fact of the matter is that bloodline needs to be incorporated
    in a way that it feels like a part of the d20 System, not a separate system
    that gets tacked on. And the easiest way for it to do that is to mesh in
    with the existing tools in the system, namely skills, feats, and spells.

    Simple fact according to who? That`s your opinion, not a fact. I disagree;
    I think the bloodline system can and maybe should be modular, something you
    can tack on to the existing system.

    >To balance with the system as it is built, bloodline should not just grant
    scions special powers with no kind of trade-off for commoners. It should,
    however, open up many more OPTIONS to the scions.

    I agree here. There should be a trade-off. But where we are in disagreement
    is the size of the tradeoff. I think it should be small; you think it
    should be large.

    >But, as I was saying, I agree fully with geeman. The big changes in the
    system from 2nd Edition to 3rd Edition call for big changes in the
    Bloodline system, since it was built on 2nd Edition mechanics.

    The only thing that depended on 2e mechanics were the effects of individual
    blood abilities. Those are easily changed (50% MR changed to 25 SR or
    whatever).

    >One example I want to note is from the Forgotten Realms. In 2nd Edition,
    noble-born drow gained extra special abilities for free, and in 3rd
    Edition, those abilities must be purchased with feats. I`m not saying this
    is the exact method that should be used, but it gives you an idea of how
    the official designers took a look at a 2nd Edition mechanic and made it
    work (and well) in 3rd Edition.

    Not a bad idea, *IF* you buy into the need to integrate bloodlines with 3e
    rules. I don`t.

    ************************************************** **************************
    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. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    317
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    >Have you seen the stuff I posted about "2e bloodline in 3e style"?
    >
    >Gary

    I have. I really like your ideas. 2e bloodline in 3e style would be a great
    way to handle bloodline generation. My only concern is that the relative
    frequency of bloodlines is off. Under the system as it stands, you only
    need to roll a 14 (-2) to get a Great bloodline. Under the old rules, it
    was only a 5% chance.

    True should be taken off as a possibility, and great should be increased to
    15 or 16. Major should be like 12-15, and the other 2 should be increased
    accordingly. IMO of course.

    I think overall your 2e bloodline in 3e style works much better than the
    scion class idea, which is not intuitive at all and rather clunky.

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

  7. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    99
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Originally posted by Shade
    Simple fact according to who? That`s your opinion, not a fact. I disagree;
    I think the bloodline system can and maybe should be modular, something you
    can tack on to the existing system.
    But it can't be completely modular. If the system from 2nd Edition was dropped into 3rd Edition, it would not work. Why? Because that system is built on 2nd Edition mechanics, which are vastly different from 3rd Edition mechanics. Thus, it needs to be rewritten to work with the d20 System.

    If you dropped it into any other game, like Vampire, it wouldn't work either. For one, the traits range from 1-5 or 1-10... with your Bloodline 60 or something for the Gorgon, it would break the system.

    And there's no need to make it modular, because this isn't about a Birthright conversion for the Storyteller System or for GURPs of the free WINDOW engine. This is for the d20 System conversion of Birthright, and it should be written for the d20 System. Simple as that.

    I agree here. There should be a trade-off. But where we are in disagreement
    is the size of the tradeoff. I think it should be small; you think it
    should be large.
    Not necessarily. If the scion's benefit is a large benefit, then yes, there should be a large tradeoff. If the scions' benefit is small, such as a +2 bonus to a skill, then the tradeoff should be small.

    My argument with the way the system worked in the document went both ways. According to it, a "powerful" scion could have less power than a weaker scion, but still be a higher ECL. That doesn't make sense. I am merely pushing for a cohesive system that makes use of the new d20 System mechanics, as opposed to making it a completely seperate system that isn't connected to the mechanics.

    The only thing that depended on 2e mechanics were the effects of individual
    blood abilities. Those are easily changed (50% MR changed to 25 SR or
    whatever).
    Actually, technically, the whole system was built on 2nd Edition mechanics because of the fact that 2nd Edition had *NO* core resolution system. It was a hodgepodge of various "simulators" that were hobbled together. Bloodline, in 2nd Edition, was tacked on, just like most of the other rules released by TSR. Bloodline, in 3rd Edition, should mesh with system and give the whole thing a feeling of consistency.

    And what about new mechanics that 2nd Edition never had? New rules and ideas that would benefit the conversion, but wouldn't be used because "there's no reason to make it work with the d20 System."

    And what about those blood abilities that were given vague descriptions in 2nd Edition? Some of them are given vague descriptions in 3rd Edition.

    Not a bad idea, *IF* you buy into the need to integrate bloodlines with 3e
    rules. I don`t.
    If we're playing 3rd Edition, then mechanics should mesh with 3rd Edition.
    I walk this fine thread...

    Mourn

  8. #18
    Site Moderator geeman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    2,165
    Downloads
    4
    Uploads
    0
    At 02:31 PM 3/16/2003 -0600, Shade wrote:

    >My only concern is that the relative frequency of bloodlines is off. Under
    >the system as it stands, you only need to roll a 14 (-2) to get a Great
    >bloodline. Under the old rules, it was only a 5% chance.
    >
    >True should be taken off as a possibility, and great should be increased
    >to 15 or 16. Major should be like 12-15, and the other 2 should be
    >increased accordingly. IMO of course.

    The way I explained this to my players is that the background feat that
    would give the +2 on the bloodline strength score would only be available
    if the DM wanted to make the possibility of players having true bloodlines
    available. One of the things I`m sure a lot of BR fans have considered is
    the idea of running a "return of the emperor" campaign in which the
    bloodline of Roele returns somehow with the character in question being the
    stereotypical "boy who must become a man/man who will become king" so
    popular in fantasy fiction.

    The actual descriptors for the bloodline strength, of course, don`t
    actually mean much unless one adds some sort of number to them in order to
    have a modifier for the purpose of DCs.... This might be a better table:

    Score Strength Modifier
    1+ Tainted +0
    4+ Minor +1
    10+ Major +2
    14+ Great +3
    20+ True +4

    The modifiers could be flipped around a bit....

    There is no way to get over 16 on the above table during character
    generation using the standard ability score generation (3-18 -2)
    suggested. At least, not without some sort of bonuses. On a table like
    the one above the background feat I was thinking would add +2 to the
    bloodline strength score check could be upgraded to +4, but I think a
    better solution might be that the character might have to dedicate both his
    feats (as a 1st level human) to get up to 20.

    I`ve always thought there should be at least one, probably two more
    bloodline strength categories. "Touched" which would represent a scion
    with the barest minimum of bloodline score (not more than 2d6 in the
    2e-->3e system) and "lesser" between Minor and Major. While that`s
    certainly not BR canon it would allow for a slightly different table with
    higher modifiers, and there`d be no need to require the optional bonus to
    bloodline strength feat to be taken twice, unless one wanted to just make
    it _that_ difficult in which case it could still be 20+ on the table below:

    Score Strength Modifier
    1+ Touched +0
    3+ Tainted +1
    6+ Minor +2
    9+ Lesser +3
    12+ Major +4
    15+ Great +5
    18+ True +6

    Just out of curiosity... how many true bloodlines are out there? Anyone
    have any thoughts on this?

    >I think overall your 2e bloodline in 3e style works much better than the
    >scion class idea, which is not intuitive at all and rather clunky.

    So far 2e --> 3e is my favorite too, though I haven`t actually had the
    opportunity to playtest it yet. I want to give the bloodline as an ability
    score method a little more time.

    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.

  9. #19
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    BR mailing list
    Posts
    1,538
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    From: "Ryan B. Caveney" <ryanb@CYBERCOM.NET>
    >
    > But this fairness breaks down as soon as you start calculating ECLs. If
    > one player buys Str, Dex and Con while another buys bloodline, and you
    > only assign an ECL to the second one, that`s completely unfair and really
    > nothing more than an admission that the point values in the buying system
    > are wrong and you don`t feel like correcting them.
    >

    I say a general ECL system works fine with character point generation
    methods. As long as the players had some idea what the campaign was going to
    be about, and spent their character points building characters geared for
    such situations, it doesn`t matter too much if that is combat, intrigue,
    investigation or whatever. Naturally, a party geared for intrigue will be
    worse at dungeoneering than a party geared for that, but that is always the
    kind of balance the Dm has to handle.

    /Carl


    __________________________________________________ ___
    Gå före i kön och få din sajt värderad på nolltid med Yahoo! Express
    Se mer på: http://se.docs.yahoo.com/info/express/help/index.html

    ************************************************** **************************
    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. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Victoria BC, Canada
    Posts
    368
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Originally posted by ConjurerDragon

    The ECL´s for major or great scions do bother me.

    Not only do non-blooded characters LOSE their bonus to XP, now blooded
    characters get a penalty instead.

    While formerly Birthright characters had something in addition to the
    core rules, now the special bloodlines will replace the advantage of
    having one or more levels of classes which you will not have, because
    you have a bloodline.

    I need to address this common misconception.

    non-Blooded characters w/ 10% bonus to XP + Blooded characters at normal XP

    EQUALS

    non-Blooded characters at normal XP + Blooded characters with ECL XP penalty

    There is still an XP gap there between both parties. All that has happened is that one group is receiving a penalty instead of the other group receiving a bonus.

    Let's look at an XP progression with ECL, shall we?

    To achieve a 5th (class) Level character -- unblooded characters require 10,000 XP total (1,000+2,000+3,000+4,000 XP). Blooded characters with an ECL of +1 require 14,000 XP total (2,000+3,000+4,000+5,000 XP), but they are considered a 6th level character for purposes of determining CR and encounter strength.

    That's a 4,000 XP gap. A bit bigger than under 2nd Ed, but then again, you can'treally equate 2nd Ed XP with 3rd Ed. Vastly different animals those two.

    -Mike
    "It may be better to be a live jackal than a dead lion, but it is better still to be a live lion -- and usually easier."

    - R. A. Heinlien, from The Collected works of Lazarus Long

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.