Page 2 of 21 FirstFirst 12345612 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 202
  1. #11
    Senior Member Osprey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    1,475
    Downloads
    34
    Uploads
    8
    Well, all in all, it is not a lot different from RPing XP awards, and ad hoc rules the day in these cases... Except if you are able to assign XP awards for the ammount of success in these same cases! My DM could do that with pretty much the same ease he would have had he looked down a table!

    Theoritecally, though, XP awards could be given in regard to how well you handled the situation, and assigning it a "virtual" CR. For example, if fighting with the enemy country and winning against it brilliantly would give you ___ XP, then solving the matter without sheer force but diplomacy should give a portion of the same number, proportionally large according to the success achieved by your players
    Someone asked recently about xp awards for regent ations, and I guess my reflection was that good explanations are especially helpful to DM's new to the game, but might always clarify things even to veterans. Ad hoc is really slippery without a solid frame of reference.
    Osprey

  2. #12
    Senior Member RaspK_FOG's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Moschato, Athens, Greece
    Posts
    1,128
    Downloads
    1
    Uploads
    0
    Sorry for being vague/using elglish wrongfully... More or less, I meant to say that most people assign XP awards for RPing ad hoc, not that it's the best solution. In my ways, RPing and Domain Actions are awarded according to the solution I mentioned, that is, according to the level of success the domain action proves to be in regard to the challenge itself. If the success is complete and unquestionable, then full XP should be awarded. If the problem is more delicate, I really don't know: individual situations need individualised thinking, except if you manage to tak eall possible situations into account and think them over...

    If the design team can cope up with it, it would be great, and the should be congratulated, but such a success is really tough a noogie, isn't it?

  3. #13
    Administrator Green Knight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    1,018
    Downloads
    20
    Uploads
    0
    In my mind it really doesn't matter WHY something made it into the BR setting, only that it did. I'm highly sceptical about changing basic stuff, and actually not caring WHY it is changed (wheter to be more 3Eish or to fit someones canception of how the writers REALLY intended BR to be).

    Take healing magic for example; In BR, only clerics can heal. There is nothing more to say on the subject. If some players don't like this, too bad, they can make their own house rules. If DnD 3E gives healing magic to bards, change it, because they do not in BR.

    Bloodlines are an add-on system, so it stays that way. Bloodlines come in tainted, minor, major, great, and true variants. There are minor, major and great blood abilities.

    Druids are priests of Erik. They're not "druids" in the 3E sense that worships nature. No, they are priests of Erik. Elves can't be druids, because druids are priests of Erik. There are no elven gods and no elven clerics, paladins (or druids).

    I could go on...but I have made my point. To me, the only worthwile BRCS is one that stays true to the original. And I'm not talking about the typos, the inconsistencies or the plain crappy stuff. I'm talking about the important stuff, the things that gave flavor to the world of BR.

    When that is said, I'll be the first to admitt that there are much to be gained from playing with the setting a little. I like to do so, and have included elven druids, clerics of Erik, and worse things beside in my many BR campaigns over the years. So have other people, and some of these ideas are SOOO good that they desreve to be included in the BRCS. But NOT as part of the main body of rules!

    Use sidebars instead, or "optional rules" or entire appendixes to present variant rules. I'd love to se the "elven druid" as a optional rule, or "he lerics of Erik and their conflict with their nomadic druid brethren" sidebar, or the Bloodlines by points" appendix.

    Cheers
    Bjørn
    Cheers
    Bjørn
    DM of Ruins of Empire II PbeM

  4. #14
    Senior Member Doyle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Box Hill, Victoria, Australia
    Posts
    138
    Downloads
    31
    Uploads
    0
    This seems to be an acceptable compromise. The arguments on 3e

    BR are at the stage where I usually delete the thread as it comes in -

    I`m not saying that there aren`t some really brilliant ideas in amongst

    them, of the few that I`ve read, there has been some really well thought

    out ideas and arguments, but after a very short while it just didn`t

    have the feel of the BR I had come to enjoy. Personally I don`t feel

    that 3e suits BR. I enjoy playing 3e in other campaigns, but the BR

    that I run (even with its little house rules), I`ll keep to 2e for the

    moment.

    A BRCS that has the non-standard BR items as either side bars or

    as an appendix would be what I`d prefer to see.

    <Ok, so this is just a "me too!" post, but it`s a while since the

    statement has been put clearly.>



    Regards,

    Doyle.



    -----Original Message-----



    Green Knight wrote:

    In my mind it really doesn`t matter WHY something made it into the BR

    setting, only that it did. I`m highly sceptical about changing basic

    stuff, and actually not caring WHY it is changed (wheter to be more

    3Eish or to fit someones canception of how the writers REALLY intended

    BR to be).



    Take healing magic for example; In BR, only clerics can heal. There is

    nothing more to say on the subject. If some players don`t like this, too

    bad, they can make their own house rules. If DnD 3E gives healing magic

    to bards, change it, because they do not in BR.



    Bloodlines are an add-on system, so it stays that way. Bloodlines come

    in tainted, minor, major, great, and true variants. There are minor,

    major and great blood abilities.



    Druids are priests of Erik. They`re not "druids" in the 3E

    sense that worships nature. No, they are priests of Erik. Elves can`t be

    druids, because druids are priests of Erik. There are no elven gods and

    no elven clerics, paladins (or druids).



    I could go on...but I have made my point. To me, the only worthwile

    BRCS is one that stays true to the original. And I`m not talking about

    the typos, the inconsistencies or the plain crappy stuff. I`m talking

    about the important stuff, the things that gave flavor to the world of

    BR.



    When that is said, I`ll be the first to admitt that there are much to

    be gained from playing with the setting a little. I like to do so, and

    have included elven druids, clerics of Erik, and worse things beside in

    my many BR campaigns over the years. So have other people, and some of

    these ideas are SOOO good that they desreve to be included in the BRCS.

    But NOT as part of the main body of rules&#33;



    Use sidebars instead, or "optional rules" or entire

    appendixes to present variant rules. I`d love to se the "elven

    druid" as a optional rule, or "he lerics of Erik and their

    conflict with their nomadic druid brethren" sidebar, or the

    Bloodlines by points" appendix.



    Cheers

    Bjørn
    Doyle

  5. #15
    Birthright Developer irdeggman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Virginia Beach, Virginia
    Posts
    3,945
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Originally posted by Osprey@Aug 20 2003, 10:18 AM
    Well, all in all, it is not a lot different from RPing XP awards, and ad hoc rules the day in these cases... Except if you are able to assign XP awards for the ammount of success in these same cases&#33; My DM could do that with pretty much the same ease he would have had he looked down a table&#33;

    Theoritecally, though, XP awards could be given in regard to how well you handled the situation, and assigning it a "virtual" CR. For example, if fighting with the enemy country and winning against it brilliantly would give you ___ XP, then solving the matter without sheer force but diplomacy should give a portion of the same number, proportionally large according to the success achieved by your players
    Someone asked recently about xp awards for regent ations, and I guess my reflection was that good explanations are especially helpful to DM&#39;s new to the game, but might always clarify things even to veterans. Ad hoc is really slippery without a solid frame of reference.
    Osprey
    Here is something that I had originally proposed for inclusion in the BRCS for domain action experience, but we dissed it as being too complex.

    Variant
    Award experience for successful domain actions. This method is of the most benefit to a PBEM or domain based game. The regent gains experience as if it was an even CR encounter, that is his character level is equal to the CR. Modify the CR based upon the modified DC of the domain action. On a successful action against DC 15 the CR for the experience award is equal to the regent’s character level, modify this by 1 for every 2 modifiers to the DC. If the modified DC is 17, the regent gains experience equivalent to a CR of 2, if the modified DC is 13 the regent gains experience equivalent to a CR ½ encounter. For example a 5th level regent successfully accomplishes a domain action with a CR of 15, he would receive 1,500 experience points, if the DC was reduced to 9 he would only receive 500 experience points (an effective CR 2), if the DC was increased to 19 he would receive 3,000 experience points. Greater challenges gain greater rewards.
    Duane Eggert

  6. #16
    Senior Member Osprey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    1,475
    Downloads
    34
    Uploads
    8
    Variant
    Award experience for successful domain actions. This method is of the most benefit to a PBEM or domain based game. The regent gains experience as if it was an even CR encounter, that is his character level is equal to the CR. Modify the CR based upon the modified DC of the domain action. On a successful action against DC 15 the CR for the experience award is equal to the regent’s character level, modify this by 1 for every 2 modifiers to the DC. If the modified DC is 17, the regent gains experience equivalent to a CR of 2, if the modified DC is 13 the regent gains experience equivalent to a CR ½ encounter. For example a 5th level regent successfully accomplishes a domain action with a CR of 15, he would receive 1,500 experience points, if the DC was reduced to 9 he would only receive 500 experience points (an effective CR 2), if the DC was increased to 19 he would receive 3,000 experience points. Greater challenges gain greater rewards.
    Hmmm...I have a hangup with xp awards based so heavily on lucky dice rolls. It says the regent who uses RP to aid domain actions gets little to no XP for succeeding at them. I feel that good strategies deserve xp awards, even if the outcome is nearly certain. It&#39;s the smart players who win in the political arena, rarely the big gamblers. If you&#39;re "average" DC for a political action is 15, you will fail 3 out of 4 times. What decent regent is willing to rule by those odds when he has Rp to burn?
    Thus, in your system the good rulers (those with a high rate of success) are those who use their RP to lower the DC, yet the best rulers advance the slowest&#33; How does that make sense?

    Osprey

    Hmmm - wait - you are talking about the final DC, modified by skill synergies, holdings, and RP expenditures, right? Or are you meaning the base DC as the xp award with the actual d20 roll modified by the conditionals? My understanding is that you meant the first option, yeah?

  7. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    BR mailing list
    Posts
    1,538
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    > Hmmm...I have a hangup with xp awards based so heavily on lucky dice rolls. It says the regent who uses RP to aid domain actions gets little to no XP for succeeding at them. I feel that good strategies deserve xp awards, even if the outcome is nearly certain. It`s the smart players who win in the political arena, rarely the big gamblers. If you`re "average" DC for a political action is 15, you will fail 3 out of 4 times. What decent regent is willing to rule by those odds when he has Rp to burn?

    > Thus, in your system the good rulers (those with a high rate of success) are those who use their RP to lower the DC, yet the best rulers advance the slowest&#33; How does that make sense?





    Rather that assigning XP based on successful domain actions, I think it

    might be wiser to assign XP based on the successful resolution of random

    events. This seems to be a far more "personal" area of regent-control,

    while offering the greatest number of possible methods of execution, and

    giving players control over just how much risk to take in regards to gaining

    XP. Some random events could be inserted for the specific use of granting

    XP to regents, or their lieutenants, or whatever. Most importantly, random

    events could be changed over time by a DM willing to do it, and can even be

    adapted to specific characters, realms, and story plots whereas arbitrary

    awards for general domain actions, really can`t.



    --



    Something to consider (not for the BRCS):

    Another completely different aspect I used for an old house game that was

    run in the style of PbeM was that I gave an Advancement Value to all the

    domain actions. Most Domain Actions had an Advancement Value of 1, others

    such as Declare War and Diplomacy had as much as 3. Because of the nature

    of the way the story unfolded, there were a few times when these Advancement

    Values had temporary modifiers such as when Rhoesone and Ghoere both got +1

    Advancement for Declare War and Contest domain actions. These values were

    used rather simply: At the end of each turn you add up all your Advancement

    Values together for that turn. Roll a d20. If the result is less than your

    total Advancement Value, you level up. It was really simplistic, but at the

    time it satisfied my criteria of awarding greater competency to more

    personal or influential domain actions without having to keep track of

    frivilous values (like ExP) that weren`t all that useful at the domain

    level. Generally speaking, domain actions that primarily effected your

    domain were worth less than domain actions that effected other domains, and

    thus got you more in the web of politics in the world and the story plots of

    the game. My only test for this worked really well; but it would have

    worked better if character level (Advancement Level) had more uses.



    -Lord Rahvin
    NOTE: Messages posted by Birthright-L are automatically inserted posts originating from the mailing list linked to the forum.

  8. #18
    Birthright Developer irdeggman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Virginia Beach, Virginia
    Posts
    3,945
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Originally posted by Osprey@Aug 24 2003, 03:13 PM
    Variant
    Award experience for successful domain actions. This method is of the most benefit to a PBEM or domain based game. The regent gains experience as if it was an even CR encounter, that is his character level is equal to the CR. Modify the CR based upon the modified DC of the domain action. On a successful action against DC 15 the CR for the experience award is equal to the regent’s character level, modify this by 1 for every 2 modifiers to the DC. If the modified DC is 17, the regent gains experience equivalent to a CR of 2, if the modified DC is 13 the regent gains experience equivalent to a CR ½ encounter. For example a 5th level regent successfully accomplishes a domain action with a CR of 15, he would receive 1,500 experience points, if the DC was reduced to 9 he would only receive 500 experience points (an effective CR 2), if the DC was increased to 19 he would receive 3,000 experience points. Greater challenges gain greater rewards.
    Hmmm...I have a hangup with xp awards based so heavily on lucky dice rolls. It says the regent who uses RP to aid domain actions gets little to no XP for succeeding at them. I feel that good strategies deserve xp awards, even if the outcome is nearly certain. It&#39;s the smart players who win in the political arena, rarely the big gamblers. If you&#39;re "average" DC for a political action is 15, you will fail 3 out of 4 times. What decent regent is willing to rule by those odds when he has Rp to burn?
    Thus, in your system the good rulers (those with a high rate of success) are those who use their RP to lower the DC, yet the best rulers advance the slowest&#33; How does that make sense?

    Osprey

    Hmmm - wait - you are talking about the final DC, modified by skill synergies, holdings, and RP expenditures, right? Or are you meaning the base DC as the xp award with the actual d20 roll modified by the conditionals? My understanding is that you meant the first option, yeah?
    Yes the final DC of the action is the one that determines the xp equivalent.

    True, the regent who modifies the result such that the success of the action is almost automatic would gain very little experience. This was by design, because he would have reduced the challenge of the action but exerting his "influence". If it is not much of a challenge then there should not be much of a reward. This equates fairly well with the method that exp are awarded in the adventuring arena, if it is "too easy" then the character gains very little. There has to be a challenge and the greater the challenge that is overcome the greater are the rewards gained.
    Duane Eggert

  9. #19
    Senior Member Osprey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    1,475
    Downloads
    34
    Uploads
    8
    True, the regent who modifies the result such that the success of the action is almost automatic would gain very little experience. This was by design, because he would have reduced the challenge of the action but exerting his "influence". If it is not much of a challenge then there should not be much of a reward. This equates fairly well with the method that exp are awarded in the adventuring arena, if it is "too easy" then the character gains very little. There has to be a challenge and the greater the challenge that is overcome the greater are the rewards gained.
    I agree with the principle that greater challenge equals greater reward, only I don&#39;t think the single roll of a d20 adequately represents a PC overcoming a challenge. I think intelligent approaches to a challenging problem are worthy of great reward, yet such a system rewards the foolish risk-taker who gets lucky. Is this the character who deserves to level up?

    Great challenges can be overcome in seemingly effortless ways by the proper application of strategy and technique. But is nothing learned, no skills improved or refined through such an approach?

    In truth, failure often teaches as much as (or more than) success. Unfortunately, D&D doesn&#39;t operate on this principle, so I&#39;m struggling to find some sort of compromise between reality and the D&D xp system. Part of that evolved into a "practice makes perfect" idea - do something correctly, and you improve the proper skills through repetition of right application.

    I don&#39;t know - I&#39;m still working on a happier solution. Maybe in the end the looser role-playing awards do work better. Must ponder this...
    Osprey

  10. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    BR mailing list
    Posts
    1,538
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    > I agree with the principle that greater challenge equals greater reward, only I don`t think the single roll of a d20 adequately represents a PC overcoming a challenge. I think intelligent approaches to a challenging problem are worthy of great reward, yet such a system rewards the foolish risk-taker who gets lucky. Is this the character who deserves to level up?

    >

    > Great challenges can be overcome in seemingly effortless ways by the proper application of strategy and technique. But is nothing learned, no skills improved or refined through such an approach?

    >

    > In truth, failure often teaches as much as (or more than) success. Unfortunately, D&D doesn`t operate on this principle, so I`m struggling to find some sort of compromise between reality and the D&D xp system. Part of that evolved into a "practice makes perfect" idea - do something correctly, and you improve the proper skills through repetition of right application.

    >

    > I don`t know - I`m still working on a happier solution. Maybe in the end the looser role-playing awards do work better. Must ponder this...

    > Osprey





    I agree with Irdegman`s analysis of the way experience works in this case,

    though I also agree with the quoted statements above. What your looking for

    is some kind of personal advancement that ties at the domain level. That`s

    great, but it`s not necessarily Exp (although it can be). Personally, I see

    bloodline as a far more significant value for personal advancement at the

    domain level.



    I`ve already suggested one method I used in an old campaign for advancing a

    regent`s level without bothering with experience awards at all. Experience

    is a very specific system that awards a particular behavior in a particular

    way, that doesn`t lend itself very well to domain actions.



    Two other options I was going to use for a campaign I was setting up (but I

    never got around to it because that campaign was scapped) were what I termed

    the Quest and Agenda methods.



    The Quest method basically evolved from my disatisfaction from the way my

    first attempt at a PbeM ran. Everyone did their own thing in a sort of

    haphazard fashion, some people never interacted with others, and everyone

    was off on their own little mini-games. Thus, I realized, as cool as it is,

    it`s not a good idea to have a campaign without a plot no matter how well

    its game mechancis may lend itself out. Thus, I decided to incorporate the

    Quest system which basically just set certain "story goals" for the campaign

    on a list. When these goals are met, the player gets an Exp and RP award.

    This list would follow a certain natural theme, and the idea was that if

    they reacted to the first couple of major events, and performed domain

    actions that followed up on those events logically, the final result would

    be a personal battle between a source mage and the regents wherein they

    would get a chance to use all those Exp they`ve been collecting.



    The Agenda method was basically inspired from a game called Paranoia, and I

    like this one best but it`s the least thoughtout at the moment. Basically,

    every domain has an agenda that`s generated along with the domain, and by

    following that agenda and keeping it secret from others the character gains

    certain agenda awards and Exp. (The agenda awards were just colorful badges

    like "bodyguards," "a festival," or the PC favorite, "new toys!" These

    agenda awards would be broken up into primary, secondary, and tertiary, and

    would usually involve preventing other regents` particular actions (and

    perhaps Agendas) rather than performing certain actions. I`ve also

    considered Minor Agendas that PCs could work toward secretly, and announce

    after they`ve accomplished it for a gobble of RP, military units, or

    automatic Rule actions. I should get back to developing this system. I

    recall really liking it when I was first brainstorming it...



    -Lord Rahvin
    NOTE: Messages posted by Birthright-L are automatically inserted posts originating from the mailing list linked to the forum.

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.