A Question

[KAI BESTE]

> > Reincarnation is much
> > for fun...
> >
> Speaking of which, has anyone developed a "BR-native" Reincarnation chart?
> 'Cause the ones suggested in the PH include creatures not found in Cerilia
> (like comming back as an Orc...HEY! Perhaps that's how Da Ork Guard got in
> here!...)

Check out the netbook, I think there were some tables...

> > I'd say they come back with their old derivation and strength, but only
> one blood point...
>
> That might be, IMO, to punative (comming back with only one point bloodline
> strength). May as well just send 'em back unblooded, IMO (heck, they just
> DIED facing the guy who stole their bloodline, probably not in better
> condition now, considering that dude was either 1) killed by the rest of
> the party shortly after he got you, and thus you can't get your point back
> or 2) he won the battle, and stripped your body of all its magic items,
> making off with them, and the other PCs recovered the body). So, come back
> unblooded, and use the various ways of "persuading" some other poor blooded
> sap to invest you with his bloodline...

But losing only one or two points would IMHO be too easy for the
character. One kill and you get them back...

> > 2. Landed regents tend to be short on money in comparison to the
> > guilds. Perhaps a little change of the taxation rules would be nice.

> the variation then doesn't affect you with the
> current system, 'cause you can pretty much expect to get the average no
> matter what, unless you get strange die rolls. With this system, you'd have
> to plan better for poor times. Also, perhaps, some simple system to
> determine the economic effect of letting raids, etc. go on in your
> territories.

Ok, that's what I wanted to say. A more even spread of wealth would
be good. And I had regents with a streak of high or low taxation, but
of course that isn't the norm.

> > 3. Mustering armies. It's unrealistic if I just snap my fingers and
> > woops - there goes my elite infantry. Troups like that have to be
> > trained or hired as mercenaries. Knights could be an exeption, they
> > are not normal soldiers but vassals of the regent (at least in a
> > feudal setting such as Anuire).


> Thus it was an inexpensive way to keep trained troops on the muster
> rolls without having to support them year round (they got paid an average
> of 6 Nomismata--oh, that's GP to you blighters, per year in cash). System
> worked rather well for about three centuries. In some ways this resembles
> the fudal system of the west, but 1) not just "knights" (cavalry) were
> supported by this system, infantry was as well and 2) Until the very end,
> the central governement wasn't swiss-cheesed by landed nobles (dukes,
> counts etc) who ended up with more power than they (I.E. France till about
> 1200 was weak as a kitten bec. of powerful, virtually independant nobles).

So was Germany when the Holy Roman Empire Germany slowly fell apart.
I knew the Romans gave land to retired legionairs, after 20 yers
service IIRC. But in mediaval times this was only done for knights. A
knight was granted a piece of land (and the people who lived on it)
in exchange for an oath of fealty. In times of peace the knight had
to oversea buisiness in his small "domain", and in times of war he
had to follow the call to arms. At the moment I'm trying to develop a
feudal system. The regent is on top, followed by some counts (one for
each province?) and then by knights.

> > 5. Rules for "conracting" Azrai's bloodline when you commit
> > bloodtheft on one of his scions.
>
> One such rule can be found in "Legends of the Hero Kings;"( P.70) if you
> kill that Ogre dude, you might get it. But, it would certainly be nice to
> have all the rules gathered into one sourcebook...

I know that rule, and I don't like it. If a character has a low
bloodline, it is almost guaranteed that he will be consumed by
Azrai's blood. I'd prefer a system that takes into account the
difference in blood points and the blood strength of the "recipient".
I came up with such a system a while back, but I don't have it at
hand right now.

just my 2GP (I'm a bit low on funds right now)

comments/ideas welcome, flames subject to magic resistance

Kai

[hobbychest@pcsia.co]

BI>> > 2. Landed regents tend to be short on money in comparison to the
BI>> > guilds. Perhaps a little change of the taxation rules would be nice.

BI>Why is this necessary..all the landed regent has to do is create a level 0
BI>guild and start his/her own trade route..presto..problem solved, income
BI>gained,

I don't like this solution to have to be forced. It isn't very
realistic that every regent has to own guild holdings. Not every king
should be a businessman. Lets allow for a little diversity.

Robert Thomson

[David Sean Brown]

No one said this had to be easy..why should income be an easy thing? :)
By the way, a level 0 guild requires no slot, and can be made in any
province (providiong it isn;t contested) The rebellious guilders are a
completely different matter. If they are giving you probs, use the law
holdings to take a pile of cash from them and as ruler of the province,
you have the power to cut off all their trade routes..no need to play nice
if they don't.

Sean


> > Why is this necessary..all the landed regent has to do is create a level 0
> > guild and start his/her own trade route..presto..problem solved, income
> > gained,
>
> Easier said than done. If you take a look at the Ruins of Empire
> almost all guild slosts (at least in the profitable provinces) are
> filled. If a regent tries to create his own guild he will be opposed
> by the guilder...not that it is a problem IMC, but in the PBeM I
> played in it was a major problem for the landed rulers to get their
> share of the pie. A lot of guilders refused to pay taxes unless
> threatenedby the ruler.
> IMHO, guilders get *way* too much money compared to the rest..
>
> just my 2GBs
>
> Kai
> ************************************************** *************************
> > 'unsubscribe birthright' as the body of the message.
>

[Sepsis]

At 02:37 PM 10/29/97 CET, Kai Beste(BESTE@jerry.iued.uni-heidelberg.de)wrote:
>
>> Speaking of which, has anyone developed a "BR-native" Reincarnation chart?
>> 'Cause the ones suggested in the PH include creatures not found in Cerilia
>> (like comming back as an Orc...HEY! Perhaps that's how Da Ork Guard got in
>> here!...)
>
>Check out the netbook, I think there were some tables...
>

I did create BR specific Reincarnation tables for the Netbook, but I will
warn you that Priests of Sera and Kriesha can bring you back as an Orc(or
even Half-Orc). This is because I use Orcs in my BR campaign. They are less
like standard AD&D Orcs(in personalirty anyway), and more like Neandertals.
They live in and around the Vos wastelands, as far from Humans as they can
get. If you don't like the idea of Orcs(or cavemen)just replace them with
another Humanoid of your choice.


Sepsis, richt@metrolink.net (ICQ:3777956)

"War is a matter of vital importance to the State;
the province of life or death;
the road to survival or ruin.
It is mandatory that it be thoroughly studied."
-Sun Tzu,(The Art of War)-

BR Netbook: http://webpages.metrolink.net/~veleda/birth.html

[Mark A Vandermeulen]

On Wed, 29 Oct 1997, KAI BESTE wrote:

> had to follow the call to arms. At the moment I'm trying to develop a
> feudal system. The regent is on top, followed by some counts (one for
> each province?) and then by knights.
>

I have always been assuming that each "province" was equivalent to a
County, i.e. ruled by a Count, under which there were a number of Barons,
equal to the population level of the province. I.e. in the County of
Ghoried in Roesone, which is a province (2/3) There is a count, and then
two Barons. Each of which can have multiple Knights as vassals (which can
be either landed, or non-landed: you may choose to give the landed Knights
the title "Baronet"). In a larger county, say County Calrie in Aerenwe,
which is 6/0, there is a Count (unless the Regent takes that as her
personal demesne) under which there are 6 Barons. However, due to the
vagarities of the feudal system, not all those Barons may actually owe
direct fealty to the Count. This is how I explain the ability of someone
other than the domain's regent to own law holdings: a certain number of
lords will lie outside of this direct pyramid, or are at best loosely tied
into it (they go through the words and actions, but everyone knows where
their true feelings lie). Thus the Barons of Caerwel in Medoere pay their
vassalage to the High Priest of Ruornil, but everyone knows that if it
comes down to choosing between him and Guilder Kalien, they'll side with
Kalien against their sworn oath of vassalage. It happened quite frequently
in medieval systems, particularly in times of conflict and war. Thus,
although the Barons in caerwil are technically vassals of the regent of
Medoere, their strings are REALLY pulled by Kalien, and he can make them
work against the regent if he wants them to. The regent of Medoere can get
real mad at them, and take their titles away from them, but that requires
him in effect to declare war on his own province, which has loyalty costs.
This system works pretty well. I actually have worked up the whole
heirarchy in one country (Osoerde) which I can post if anyone is
interested. It adds a lot of depth to a politically-oriented game. Further
complications can be added by using the sort of "half-ranks" like
viscount. For example, in Osoerde, I said that the ruler of County Moergen
was only allowed to take the title "viscount" once Raenech took the
throne, because he was a relative of the fugitive Prince. He still has all
the power and responsibility of a Count, but because they resurrected this
old title that hadn't really been used since the fall of the Empire, the
ruler was of lower rank than almost any other county ruler in the nation.
Needless to say, it stung.

Let me know if anyone wants me to spend the time typing up this heirarchy.
Time is something I do not have an abundance of right now, so I'll only do
it if there's interest.

Mark VanderMeulen
vander+@pitt.edu

[David Sean Brown]

>
> I don't like this solution to have to be forced. It isn't very
> realistic that every regent has to own guild holdings. Not every king
> should be a businessman. Lets allow for a little diversity.

What do you mean by diversity? There eally is only 3 ways to make money by
the rules..holding income (including trade routes and law claims),
province iownership and vassalage. If you want diversity, you have to
roleplay the gholdings..what kinds do the regents ahve as opposed to the
guilder? Who says a guild holding has to be a business..maybe it is an
information net the regent uses to pick up some $$ on the side? Perhaps
I'm just not understanfding what it is you mean, but...

Sean

[Andrew Kerle]

That sounds great... I'm Interested....

AJK

[hobbychest@pcsia.co]

BI>What do you mean by diversity? There eally is only 3 ways to make money by
BI>the rules..holding income (including trade routes and law claims),
BI>province iownership and vassalage. If you want diversity, you have to
BI>roleplay the gholdings..what kinds do the regents ahve as opposed to the
BI>guilder? Who says a guild holding has to be a business..maybe it is an
BI>information net the regent uses to pick up some $$ on the side? Perhaps
BI>I'm just not understanfding what it is you mean, but...

I'm saying the only way that works to make money right now is trade
routes. Trade routes require guilds. I don't think every regent should
have to have guild holdings in order to have enough money to survive.
If the other methods of getting money (taxes and temples) were balanced
with trade routes and guilds a little better, this wouldn't be the
situation.

Robert Thomson

[Brenda L Santer]

On Wed, 29 Oct 1997, KAI BESTE wrote:

> had to follow the call to arms. At the moment I'm trying to develop a
> feudal system. The regent is on top, followed by some counts (one for
> each province?) and then by knights.
>

Mark VanderMeulen replied:

>I have always been assuming that each "province" was equivalent to a
>County, i.e. ruled by a Count, under which there were a number of Barons,
>equal to the population level of the province. I.e. in the County of
>Ghoried in Roesone, which is a province (2/3) There is a count, and then
>two Barons.


It sounds like you have done a lot of work on this system Mark. However,
the problem with this system IMHO is that a whole lot of other titles then
have to be changed to accomodate it. The rules of various kingdoms may be
counts (as in Taeghas or Ilien), Dukes (as in Tuornen and Osoerde), Barons
(as in Diemed and Ghoere), Princes (as in Avanil), or Archdukes (as in
Boeruine), or Queen (as in Aerenwe), as well as the vaious titles that
indicate priestly rulers.

The various titles of baron, duke, count, prince, etc. all reflect the
status of the ancestor within the Empire before the Anuirean Empire fell
apart. At the present time, all of the barons, counts, dukes,princes, and
others are of equal rank--all rule countries. Although in the past, a Duke
may have controlled a larger area than a count and a count controlled a
larger area than a baron, this is no longer true (look at what the Baron of
Ghoere controlls).Changing all of the titles to reflect this system would
be a problem. Also, I like the fact that the vaious titles are o longer
indicative of status. For me, it is a constant reminder that things were
once different than they are now, and that the desire to rebuild the empire
is strong in Anuire still.


****************************************
Brenda Santer:

mailto:bsanter@sk.sympatico.ca
****************************************

[David Sean Brown]

This is true, but hasn't it been shown that even in real life, the
businessmen (be it legitimate or otherwise) tend to make more money than
the tax collection or religious dontion? Theoritecially, you shouldn't be
able to get rich by taxing your subjects..the income gained here is
supposed to be sufficient to upkeep the kingdom...to make more money than
this, it really should be necessary to branch out. One way is to apply
taxes to guilds and trade routes. This isn't the same as the taxes gained
through law holdings or provinces, but can be used just the same. In our
campaign, guilders are required to pay 1GB/3 guild levels they posess in
the regents domain. At first the guild tried to hold out, but when all
their trade routes were cut, they began to see the logic in it...


Sean



> I'm saying the only way that works to make money right now is trade
> routes. Trade routes require guilds. I don't think every regent should
> have to have guild holdings in order to have enough money to survive.
> If the other methods of getting money (taxes and temples) were balanced
> with trade routes and guilds a little better, this wouldn't be the
> situation.
>
> Robert Thomson
>
>
> ************************************************** *************************
> > 'unsubscribe birthright' as the body of the message.
>