In my personal experiences the rules mechanics have absolutely no bearing
on the amount of role-playing in any given game. It is the players on the
whole that define how much RP is present. I am a player of White Wolf's
storyteller series of games as well as an avid AD&D fan, and any changes to
make BR more role-playable (for lack of a better term) would have to be
changes in the AD&D system itself, and not in the campaign worlds.

AD&D itself recognizes hack-and-slash more than honest character
interaction (the xp rewards for defeating a dragon as opposed to a
"meaningful sacrifice" on the part of a character speak for themselves -
12,000xp vs suggested max limit of 500?) As character advancement is tied
to gaining more xp (even skill use is limited by experience level), and the
most expedient method to gain xp is by facing your enemies with a sword, it
is little wonder that AD&D as a system fosters roll-playing as opposed to

People who are dissatisfied with this have made their own changes (as I
have) or adopted new systems (I've know friends to use D&D supplements for
their RoleMaster games).

My initial attraction to BR was the fact that we could start as kings and
queens (or whatever). After purchase and understanding, I found that I
loved the domain turn system (despite some obvious limitations which
creative players have overcome). TSR/WotC might want to check out the
Netbook that's been established by Darkstar and mirrored by Sepsis and
others (sorry guys, don't know who else is mirroring).

I noted a "Forgotten BR" response out here on the list and really do agree.
I stopped buying Forgotten Realms because of the intensive and
overwhelming magic and illogical countries, not to mention the "doomed
peoples" that never seem to meet their dooms.

Whatever changes are made to Birthright, please strive to keep the core of
it alive and well, that being the interaction of kings and queens on a
grand basis, and a not collection of royal brats out to find the next
dungeon or slay the next dragon.

Tim Nutting