- --
hello, Adam Theo here,
good approach, Mr Stark. I like the fact that certain info like that
should be kept out of the eyes of players. cause then you don't have
any of that "i'll attack here cause that has a castle, even though i
havn't espionaged that.". true i could just say "well, wadda ya know,
your troops find a nice big fort fulla grinnin archers with vats of
boilin oil for ya :) but then the players puts forth a good point of
why a kingdom would spend money on a effective castle in a 2/4
un-srategic prov.

> Right or not, we chose to exclude specific information (like
> fortifications, roads, etc) about domains in the Campaign Expansions unless
> absolutely necessary (the law holdings in Berhagen are a good example) so
> that the DM could build off the existing information without overruling
> anything in print. The Domain Sourcebooks (some of them) list this more
> specific information, because we figured if you wanted to buy a DS on a
> particular realm, you really, really wanted our take on the place.
> Most DMs can probably infer from existing info where some prominent
> fortifications are. Danigau, for example, obviously has some sort of
> fortification in its capital--it's illustrated on one of the cards.
> However, the DM can decide how extensive the fortification is.
> -- ->-- ->-- ->--@
> Ed Stark
> Game Designer, Wizards of the Coast/TSR Division
> TSR Website: http://www.tsrinc.com
> (soon to be http://www.tsr.com)

adamtheo@usa.net Florida, USA
adamtheo@hotmail.com *Webmaster* want a website?
ICQ: 3617306 * page me at http://wwp.mirabilis.com/3617306
ichat: adamtheo
* a free-market libertarian confucionist social-darwinist

Destiny of Regents Birthright PBeM
* http://www.Geocities.com/TimesSquare/Realm/2315