FAQ topics discussion

**First Horseman** · 04-26-2004, 03:02 AM

With the up coming Atlus of Cerilia coming up, would it be safe to use and 2ed Box sets, and Player Secrets to use as a refernce for the number of law,religion and source holdings for the 3. 5 Birthright.

Thanks in Advance

First Horseman

**Raesene Andu** · 04-26-2004, 06:12 AM

Yes, the holding levels and regent have not changed significantly. Some NPCs will have different stats and realms will have expanded descriptions, but that is all, the information on province levels, the holdings within, etc have not changed.

The only exceptions to this rule as some errors from the original material that have been corrected (elven magic potential levels being one major correction).

**First Horseman** · 04-26-2004, 11:37 AM

Thanks Raesene Andu, I don't think I'll be using any of the Elven lands for my campaign quite as yet, however you said the Magic levels are total wrong. So in that case we should just use the d20 Birthright source holdings, Right?

First Horseman

**Arjan** · 04-26-2004, 12:28 PM

I have splitted the thread and moved the posts to a new thread

**Fearless_Leader** · 04-27-2004, 07:33 PM

Originally posted by First Horseman@Apr 26 2004, 03:37 AM
Thanks Raesene Andu, I don't think I'll be using any of the Elven lands for my campaign quite as yet, however you said the Magic levels are total wrong. So in that case we should just use the d20 Birthright source holdings, Right?

I think the answer to your question (if I understand it correctly) is yes. The source levels of elven realms will be revised in the Atlas.

However. If you want to use the old source levels that's fine too. There's no writ in the sky saying "USE ONLY THE NEW PRODUCTS!"

**Raesene Andu** · 04-27-2004, 11:15 PM

The only major change to source and holding levels will be to adjust the magic potential of elven provinces to */9 (forest = 7, +2 for elven influence).

The rest of the holdings and province levels will remain the same unless there was an error in the original material. (There are a few errors in Haven's of the Great Bay).

**Sir Justine** · 05-06-2004, 04:43 PM

(There are a few errors in Haven's of the Great Bay).

Like what? I mean, if it is worth saying. It is just that I use this book regularly...
Thanks!

**Raesene Andu** · 05-07-2004, 01:42 AM

The major one I can think of is the Copper and Coke mixup. Look at the description of that guild (re: their holdings) and then check the various realm descriptions. It looks (at least to me) as if two different regents control the same guild in some places.

There are others, but without my books in front of me I couldn't give you details right now.

**Arjan** · 05-08-2004, 09:49 AM

Originally posted by Raesene Andu@May 7 2004, 02:42 AM
The major one I can think of is the Copper and Coke mixup. Look at the description of that guild (re: their holdings) and then check the various realm descriptions. It looks (at least to me) as if two different regents control the same guild in some places.

There are others, but without my books in front of me I couldn't give you details right now.

same goes for the Temple of the White hand..

**Raesene Andu** · 05-08-2004, 10:22 AM

Yep, the White Hand is another one. From the books it is difficult to tell if it is two seperate temples, or one with holdings in two locations. There are also a number of minor error that you begin to notice with time...