Results 1 to 4 of 4
  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    144
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    The rulebook's example in the contest action has two holdings of the same type competing. Is it just an example or is it specifically prohibited to have a temple contest the law of the land? Also, if it is just an example (and so a temple can contest a law) is it the same for sources too, can a temple holding contest a source holding?

    Short and to the point answers with some minimal explanation would be most appreciated.

  2. #2
    Birthright Developer
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    388
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    On Fri, 13 Jun 2003, A_dark wrote:
    > The rulebook`s example in the contest action has two holdings of the
    > same type competing. Is it just an example or is it specifically
    > prohibited to have a temple contest the law of the land?

    Yes, just an example, no, not prohibited, so a temple can contest a law
    holding.

    > Also, if it is just an example (and so a temple can contest a law) is it
    > the same for sources too, can a temple holding contest a source holding?

    I would rule no for my game, but I don`t think there`s anything
    specifically prohibited about it. But law, temple, and guild holdings
    fall into the same general category in my mind, of organizations of people
    and facilities loyal to the regent, and sources don`t fit in there. I`d
    allow them to affect each other and not sources in this way.
    --
    Daniel McSorley

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

  3. #3
    Administrator Green Knight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    1,012
    Downloads
    20
    Uploads
    0
    This is an interesting question.

    Why should not a powerful guild, law or temple ruler be able to interfere with a province's source holders?

    Well, I think they should, but the Contest action probably isn't very appropriate. The "mundane" regents must seek out other ways to harm the source holders. Perhpas through military occupation, adventures, or divine realm magic. But not through the contest action.

    The same applies the other way around. Source holdings should not be able to contest other holding types, for the same reasons.

    Alternatively, one might use the "domain actions allowed based on source level" table. Perhaps a powerful source holder, could indeed use his holding to contest other holding types, just as he can now create trade routes. Just a thought.

    B
    Cheers
    Bjørn
    DM of Ruins of Empire II PbeM

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    144
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Thank you both. I am of the same opinion as Dan McSorley is, but I needed a second opinion to be sure I am headed the right path...

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.