Chap 1 Rev

[Don E]

Originally posted by tcharazazel@May 4 2004, 12:11 PM
Because with your system, of just requiring ability and skill focus, they could have 0 ranks in the skill and yet be masters at it... they could even be Masters from level 1 if they are human and take skill focus in the skill and then the Master feat and still have 0 ranks in the skill. This just makes no sense for the idea behind the feat.

Hence, I still believe that requiring a certain number of ranks in the skill be an important factor, certainly more important than just having skill focus in the skill.

Conseptually I see nothing wrong with a character having the Skill Focus feat but only a few ranks in the relevant skill. While traditionally most feats are viewed as abilities or techniques learned, I tend to see skill enhancing feats as more of a natural talent of the character. Hence a character with skill focus, and potential a master feat or greater skill foucs, but with few ranks simply possess an untapped potential in the relecant skill.

On a more fundamental level I am still undecided on the issue of feats with a domain level effect. This topis has probably been discussed before, but please bear with me. I know feats are a new game mechanic in in 3e, but there was very few ways in which the character's own skill had any effect on the domain level of play in 2e BR. For me the jury is still out on whether this is good or bad. My primary concern is that the stacking of bonuses from skills and one or more feats could potentially have an unbalancing effect on the game. I think we have all seen how incredibly popular this feats have become in the game, and especially so in PBeMs.

My main fear at the moment is on the issue of magic items. In my (rather vague) memory there are few published magica items that give any bonus on the domain level of play, and I think all of these are artifacts or relics. With the new domain bonus feats it would become scarily easy for even minor magic items to give huge (and potentially severely unbalancing) bonuses on domain actions. What I see as a potential danger is every wizard worth his salt creating some magic item, even before starting to aquire sources, granting him the Master Arcanist, Regent Focus (Rule Source) and Regent Focus (Contest Source). While I am sure most DMs would try limit this kind of behaviour, the can of worms would be open and the potential for abuse quite significant.

Personally I think it might be safer (but perhaps less fun) to simply stick with the current skill enhancing feats and to only give a bonus on domain actions related to the skill total of the character. Each action could have one or two skill associated with them, and the total divided by five or ten respectively would give the relevant bonus on the domain action. That is of course only if one really wants character level play to have a direct influence on the domain level of play.

Another problem with the current feats, and especially the Regent Focus ones, is that the open up for characters of various classes becoming very proficient in actions not really realted to their core concept. Who want the ruthless warlord to be as able as the master guilder in affairs of commerce? Relating domain bonuses to skill total limits this problem considerably.

Thanks for you patience and attention.
Cheers,
E

[Osprey]

One problem I see though is having a prereq of a set number of ranks in a skill that the feat ends up providing a bonus to. Seems sort of like a vicious spiral type of thing. It feeds on and promotes its own growth. Using Skill Focus as a prereq might be better, in essence allowing the master feats to become an improved skill focus type of thing.

Isn't this exactly how real-life specialties work, though? You have to have a clue before you can "master" a skill, correct? In fact, you had better be pretty darn competent...

I think the reason for requiring ranks is one I argued a while back...it simply makes sense. More sense than the lack of requirements for skill-based feats in the 3.5 PHB to be perfectly honest. Why sink to the lowest common denominator on this one?

Irdeggman, step away from the 3.5 core rules, briefly, and examine the feats for a sense of internal consistency and logic; then compare them to the BR setting, and ask how well they fit/balance there; THEN see how well they agree with 3.5 or not.

Personally, I don't see any problem with the way they've been written out, though I'd say 9 ranks in one main skill per feat is sufficient for a requirement.

These aren't like any PHB feats anyways. They are very distinctly their own set of regent feats specific to the BR world. Which means they can have their own requirements and their own set of rules. We don't have to ape WOTC at every turn.

Knowledge (local) is the most useless skill for 99% of PC's as ever met the PHB. Knowledge (Regional) should replace it, even to the extent of granting the +2 synergy bonus to Gather Information in that region...nobody has enough skill points to get K/Local in more than one place, yet guild regents in the BR world would certainly be experts in more than one province or town. While K/Local might be fine for NPC "locals", it's way too narrow for regents and travelling adventurers, not to mention spymasters...

[tcharazazel]

My point was that having a minimum rank prerequisite for a skill that the feat provides a bonus to is a circular argument. Using the Skill Focus feat as a prerequiste (for 2 different feats) would require a character to be at least 3rd level (if human) in order to be eligible and by the very purpose of the Skill Focus feat it makes the character be focused on those aspects. Otherwise those classes with more skill points per level automatically gain a benefit. If requiring the Skill Focus feats as prerequisites then only the Noble class would have a clear benefit from a class standpoint and I think that was one of the issues brought up - that nobles should have an inside track on getting to the Master level feats.

I guess I'm missing how its a circular argument to require 9 ranks in a skill to get a Master feat.. so to break it down sentence by sentence.

2) Actually if you have humans getting a bonus feat (for being human as per the PHB) then if the only requirement is to get the skill focus feat, they can get the Master feat at 1st level, and still have 0 ranks in the skill. Just because you get skill focus, doesnt mean that you are totally focused upon the skill because unlike epic skill focus, skill focus doesnt require any ranks.

3)Actually having it be 9 ranks in the relevant skill would limit those people who have those skills as class skills, instead of any class, like Don E pointed out a Warlord could be a Master Merchant just as easily as the Guilder. True for those clases who get less skill points they would have to decide to spend them on the relevent skills otherwise... they would not be able to get the Master feats. This would also promote Nobles to being the most dominant ruling class as they have all of the required Master skills as class skills, which makes sense doesnt it?

4) So actually, as noted jsut above Nobles do have the inside track currently as they have all the required Master skills as class skills, and they also have the skill points to keep at least some of them up. And Actually, as also mentioned above, with your current system of only requiring skill focus, it does not give nobles the inside track at all, it gives anybody who is human or if not human, to be able to get the Master feats at either 1st or 3rd level no matter what class they are.

Ok, so after breaking down what you said, im still not folllwong how the idea of requiring ranks is a circular argument... mayb you could elaborate a little more?

My main fear at the moment is on the issue of magic items. In my (rather vague) memory there are few published magica items that give any bonus on the domain level of play, and I think all of these are artifacts or relics. With the new domain bonus feats it would become scarily easy for even minor magic items to give huge (and potentially severely unbalancing) bonuses on domain actions. What I see as a potential danger is every wizard worth his salt creating some magic item, even before starting to aquire sources, granting him the Master Arcanist, Regent Focus (Rule Source) and Regent Focus (Contest Source). While I am sure most DMs would try limit this kind of behaviour, the can of worms would be open and the potential for abuse quite significant.

Yeah, this is something that is up to the DM, as normally BR is considered a low magic world with regard to having very very few magic items. Even without adding Master of the Arcane feat to those 2 regent focus feats would make it a very potent item. Heh, may add Regent Focus (Create Source) and Regent Focus (Create Ley Line) to the list also. Though looking at the 3.5 DMG, on Table 7-33 pg 285, it doesnt really offer a price to add a feat to an item. So, the DM could easily rule that it cant be made until maybe a Academy of Magic wonder is created and hes paying for it, or never heheh.

Personally I think it might be safer (but perhaps less fun) to simply stick with the current skill enhancing feats and to only give a bonus on domain actions related to the skill total of the character. Each action could have one or two skill associated with them, and the total divided by five or ten respectively would give the relevant bonus on the domain action. That is of course only if one really wants character level play to have a direct influence on the domain level of play.

Currently, the bonus to a domain action from the relevent skill is from ranks in that skill, So it is solely dependent upon character level, and if that skill is a class skill. The proposed change was to allow lower level characters with good natural talent and/or skill focus to be better at it sooner. (skill modifier/5 = bonus to domain action) The MAster feats just help the characters to build up their realms a little easier 10% to be exact, so its not an over powering type of feat really, and after playtesting it for a while now it really only comes into play occasionally, cause you either have a good chance at making the roll or you dont most of the time.

[Osprey]

A Note on Domain Action DC's (this will be posted in Ch. 5 section, too):

Was it really necessary in the BRCS to lower DC's by one from their 2e origins?

IMC, for Rule Province or Holding I use DC 10 + target level of province/holding, which you might have noticed reading tcharazazel's examples ( I think he forgot that I even changed that ).

In BRCS it was DC 10 + current level of province or holding.

To be blunt, I think my system's better: this way, it's 1 DC harder for every action, which answer's Athos69's concern about the +1/+2 bonus on Master Feats...there's where the extra +1 gets sucked up.

Also, it keeps ruling to higher levels just a tad harder, which is necessary when allowing +1 per +5 skill.

Finally, it makes a distinction between the Create Holding DC (10) and Ruling a Holding to level 1 (DC 11 now, was DC 10 in BRCS).

Raesene, a question: If Create Holding is so resource intensive that it cannot be done as a Realm Action, why is it one of the easiest Domain Actions in the game at DC 10? Whereas Ruling Holdings is more difficult, yet it's no problem to do up to 6 a month with a sufficient court?

[tcharazazel]

Lol, yeah, i totally forgot about that, as you changed it so long ago...

[Osprey]

My main fear at the moment is on the issue of magic items. In my (rather vague) memory there are few published magica items that give any bonus on the domain level of play, and I think all of these are artifacts or relics. With the new domain bonus feats it would become scarily easy for even minor magic items to give huge (and potentially severely unbalancing) bonuses on domain actions. What I see as a potential danger is every wizard worth his salt creating some magic item, even before starting to aquire sources, granting him the Master Arcanist, Regent Focus (Rule Source) and Regent Focus (Contest Source). While I am sure most DMs would try limit this kind of behaviour, the can of worms would be open and the potential for abuse quite significant.

Well, Tcharazazel mentioned the one limiter: feats don't normally get granted by magic items, with a few exceptions (Mighty Cleaving on weapons and intelligent items).

Limiter 2: when you publish the revised BRCS, simply don't list any magic items with domain action bonuses. OR...

#3: Assign very high GP values to such items, or even better, make them Artifacts, such that the only types of domain-enhancing items are skill-enhancing items (like a Tome of Finance for Administrate), which will then only add +1 per +5 skill bonus to domain actions. Nothing huge there, right? A +1 or 2 domain bonus from a magic item shouldn't be a severe unbalancer, and it should require a constant kind of bonus (rather than #of uses per day), as domain actions are month-long actions.

Osprey

[irdeggman]

Originally posted by Osprey@May 4 2004, 10:59 AM

Knowledge (local) is the most useless skill for 99% of PC's as ever met the PHB. Knowledge (Regional) should replace it, even to the extent of granting the +2 synergy bonus to Gather Information in that region...nobody has enough skill points to get K/Local in more than one place, yet guild regents in the BR world would certainly be experts in more than one province or town. While K/Local might be fine for NPC "locals", it's way too narrow for regents and travelling adventurers, not to mention spymasters...

How 'big' is the region? Is it the Southern Coast? Anuire? A single Province?

Should knowledge (region) let the character have the same benefit for the Imperial City as for Avanil? The Imperial City, IMO, is so large and distinctive that it should be its own region. Things run differently there than anywhere else. Knowledge (local) which is what is being replaced here - gives bonuses to Gather Information checks based on knowing local laws, customs, personalities, etc. Laws and customs change drastically between places. Again using the Imperial City as an a example - the laws and customs there are greatly different than those just outside the city. It is specifically its own place (like the Vatican inside Rome).

What exactly a region is needs to be defined for this skill. For while all of Anuire has similar cultural tendencies (ala background skills and feats) each province has its own set of personalities, laws and customs. It is this last information that is being used for the bonuses to Gather Information (or Espionage as the domain action in question).

[Athos69]

Originally posted by irdeggman+May 4 2004, 04:48 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (irdeggman @ May 4 2004, 04:48 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Athos69@May 4 2004, 05:00 AM
Hmmmm... so you&#39;re proposing that the Prereqs be a combination of ability, Skill Focus and Level....

I hope you are not referring to my comment since I never made the connection of level. [/b][/quote]
Actually, yes. You see, we don&#39;t want Level 1 or level 3 Master anythings, do we? If we nix the rank prerequisite, we have no control save character level.

[tcharazazel]

How &#39;big&#39; is the region? Is it the Southern Coast? Anuire? A single Province?

It&#39;s for each cultural sub region, such as Southern Coast, Heartlands, Western Coast, ect.

[Athos69]

Originally posted by irdeggman@May 4 2004, 11:02 AM
How &#39;big&#39; is the region? Is it the Southern Coast? Anuire? A single Province?

Should knowledge (region) let the character have the same benefit for the Imperial City as for Avanil? The Imperial City, IMO, is so large and distinctive that it should be its own region. Things run differently there than anywhere else. Knowledge (local) which is what is being replaced here - gives bonuses to Gather Information checks based on knowing local laws, customs, personalities, etc. Laws and customs change drastically between places. Again using the Imperial City as an a example - the laws and customs there are greatly different than those just outside the city. It is specifically its own place (like the Vatican inside Rome).

What exactly a region is needs to be defined for this skill. For while all of Anuire has similar cultural tendencies (ala background skills and feats) each province has its own set of personalities, laws and customs. It is this last information that is being used for the bonuses to Gather Information (or Espionage as the domain action in question).

I&#39;ve always seen the difference between Local and Regional to be purely a matter of scale. A very good example would be a bard with K/Local.

He knows what&#39;s going on in every thorp and hamlet in the province, who&#39;s shagging the mayor&#39;s daughter in the dead of night in the barn (probably him, but I digress), how many calves farmer Brown had last season, who bakes the best bread and local legends of an ancient army&#39;s graveyard, now covered by the trees over yonder.

He would not likely know the political currents that flow through and subtly change the province, whispers of potential war with the Kingdom&#39;s neighbour, that a new overseer to the King&#39;s tax collectors has been appointed recently and he has an addiction to expensive artwork, nor woud he know that the temple that spans three kingdoms takes a dim view of it.

Conversely, a noble with K/Regional wouldn&#39;t give a damn about such &#39;provincial&#39; matters that our bard knows. He&#39;d be concerned with the larger scale of things.

To directly answer your question, Local should be a single province. The Imperial City would be the focus of a Local skill. The Heartlands would be an example of a Regional skill. I would also have to postulate that if you have ranks in a Local skill, and 5 or more ranks in the Region that it is in, you should get a synergy bonus to the Local Skill, but not the oter way around.