Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 42
  1. #21
    Jim Cooper
    Guest

    Unblooded regents

    Mark A Vandermeulen wrote:
    >
    > On Thu, 5 Mar 1998, Jim Cooper wrote:
    >
    > > Oh, and what happens when said unblooded ruler marches armies in said
    > > blooded regent's domain, thereby contesting the little blooded
    > > lordling's holding(s)? End result, the blooded regent is on par now
    > > with the unblooded ruler! The guy has no advantage now, does he? :-0
    >
    > Yes, but once again, there's nothing stopping the blooded ruler from
    > raising an army of his own, and fighting off the unblooded ruler's armies.
    > May I ask what your stake in having unblooded rulers is? Because you
    > certainly seem dedicated to rescueing them from the tyrrany of the rules.
    > Not that this is necessarily a bad thing! But if we knew WHY you wanted to
    > have and maintain unblooded rulers in Cerillia, we might be able to help
    > you better. :)
    >

    Actually, I don't favour one over the other. Hmmm ... how do I put this
    ... I was only trying to point out that there really is no particular
    disadvantage to being unblooded. I was responding to a post that
    suggested that an unblooded person would submit himself to terms of
    vassalage to a blooded regent so that his holdings could then be used to
    their full potential. I was only suggesting, in my own interpretation
    of course, that such a suggestion would be ridiculous to the
    aformentioned unblooded ruler, from their world perspective. Why would
    a lord submit himself to someone lower than himself, especially a
    merchentman, merely because he is blooded? Perhaps I misunderstood the
    post, and certainly a DM is free to rule whatever fits their style of
    play in a campaign.

    My 'dedication' to 'saving' unblooded people only results from
    restricting myself to a concise arguement which favours considering
    unblooded rulers as being just as likely be able to rule as a blooded
    person. The same can be said about unblooded elves and realm magic.
    (Unfortunately, I have come across as belligerent to some members, for
    which I am truly sorry. My choice of words in previous posts have
    obviously be poor). I can totally see a republic forming, as suggested
    in various BR books, with many unblooded senators (or what-have-you)
    ruling ... its a shame that the BR designers have not shown that this is
    in fact possible - so far, just about every regent in BR I have seen has
    been blooded, and naturally people are beginning to assume (judging from
    posts to this list) that this has to be the case (again, this is my
    opinion). I have seen several posts, recently, that suggested unblooded
    rulers would have to submit to blooded subjects in order to receive the
    all important RPs. This is only a function of the rules as they stand
    now, of course. But the rules also allow regents to have up to level
    '1' holdings/provinces without having to spend regency points.
    Moreover, one only needs to control armies (nothing else, if I'm not
    mistaken) in order to be called a regent. Therefore, I bet there are a
    lot of unblooded merc. captains out there that would have the potential
    to wield much political power. And to return to your original post
    above, the blooded regent wouldn't have any advantage over the unblooded
    regent in this scenario because the holdings of the blooded regent are
    being contested at the moment and so are not contributing regency points
    to the blooded ruler! If this nightmare encompasses the blooded ruler's
    entire domain, said ruler need no longer, in effect, be considered
    blooded, correct?

    Being of the blood does have its advantages, no doubt about that, but
    considering that less than 1% (or whatever) of Cerilia's population is
    blooded, it just seems to me that there would be more UNblooded rulers
    out there - if only in the 'lesser' kind of holdings opened to the
    common class (like guild holdings).

    This might also explain why peasants are now 'more free' in
    Anuire/Brecht/wherever - the unblooded people are finally becoming tired
    of those people who think that 'divineblood' is a requirement to rule!
    Doesn't this sound familiar? I can think of many historical examples
    concerning democracy and suffrage, etc., where this *exact* arguement
    brought out those cherished ideals we in the RW hold today.

    Why should those less fortunate Cerilians, who haven't been blessed with
    'divinity', sit on their laurels and accept 'their lot in life'? Why
    _wouldn't_ unblooded people in Anuire (or elsewhere) begin to fight to
    become regents - or, if already in a position of regency, keep that
    which they have and act just like any other blooded person? The only
    difference would be that ruling would be harder ... not that rulership
    was every easy! If any of you are sticklers for a bit of realism in
    your games, start a campaign where the PCs are unblooded regents, and
    give them an idea just how hard the lives of honest and good rulers can
    get!

    Please note that, as suggested in Legends of the Hero-Kings, regents can
    get regent points just for solving the adventure to the DMs
    satisfaction. So, take a merc. captain that controls nothing but armies
    - - being unblooded, would he get regency points? In my opinion, that
    regent should, since armies can act as de facto law holdings.

    The only question is, can unblooded people accumulate RPs if given them?

    Just my usual rant,
    Darren

  2. #22
    David Sean Brown
    Guest

    Unblooded Regents

    Sorry Bret, but you are still wrong. If you keeop reading in the same
    heading (rule action) it says:
    "Ruling a holding or province from level 0 to level 1 costs 1GB; no RP's
    must be spent"

    So climbing to level 1 in anything doesn't cost any RPs, so technically,
    and unblooded individual could do it :)

    Sean

    PS- you watch now, after sending something to the list for the first time
    in a long time, I'll have missed the whole point of the argument :)



    > Okay. Read that carefully. It is the TARGET LEVEL that determines the cost. Thus, a Guild(0) to
    > Guild(1) would cost 1 GB plus 1 RP; Guild(1) to Guild(2) would be 1 GB+2 RP;Guild(2) to Guild(3) is
    > 1 GB + 3 RP; etc... Just as in the example above =)
    >
    > I may be new, but the rules are fairly clear in this...
    >
    > Note, however, that Ruling a PROVINCE level costs 1 GB plus 1 RP per level based on the Provinces
    > Current level. Thus, a Province(0) to Province(1) would cost 1 GB+ 0 RP. The same does not hold
    > true for holding, though.. Thus the confusion. A subtle but important distinction.
    >
    > So, with the old arguments, a non-blooded could form a Holding only to 0, but could move a Province
    > to 1.

  3. #23
    Taras Guarhoth
    Guest

    Unblooded Regents

    Well, not to ruin the discussion, but, from the Book of Magecraft, p.
    48, 2nd column, end of the third paragraph:

    "Unblooded magicians, like unblooded individuals of any character
    class, cannot be regents."

    Taras Guarhoth
    guarhoth@yahoo.com

    __________________________________________________ _______
    DO YOU YAHOO!?
    Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

  4. #24
    Bret W. Davenport
    Guest

    Unblooded Regents

    Taras Guarhoth wrote:

    > Well, not to ruin the discussion, but, from the Book of Magecraft, p.
    > 48, 2nd column, end of the third paragraph:
    >
    > "Unblooded magicians, like unblooded individuals of any character
    > class, cannot be regents."

    Ah. That seems pretty straightforward.

    Perhaps what needs to be discussed is the terms Regent and Regency
    themselves. Regent and Regency, in the case of Birthright, seems to me
    to indicate a supernatural tie one in power has to the land. This tie to the
    land (and the people associated with it) would enable them to affect the
    domain they rule with extraordinary success. Consider the fact that an
    entire province's population, by force of will alone, can be altered by these
    blooded rulers - all in one month! Wow. Think about it. Magic is reduced.
    Population increases. Etc. The very fabric of society is altered. A rural
    community with few establishments, in the course of only a few months,
    could expand to a major city, all at the urging of one individual. That is
    what marks them as individuals of power and influence. Certainly, no
    creature without this "god-like" power could possibly hope to effect the
    same results. How does this come about, one might wonder? Well,
    the ways of gods were always mysterious, and thus, the regents would
    also be able to perform feats seemingly impossible. Perhaps stragglers
    from neighboring provinces suddenly feel this draw to the expanding
    territory. To become a part of a society, when they were outside this
    realm before. Remote farmers would suddenly find themselves bending
    a knee to this person of aura, where they were always removed from
    society and serving only themselves. Unexpected booms in childbirth.
    A sudden decrease in death caused by disease and tragidy. All of
    these things would go relatively unnoticed, in general, but it would
    bring about this great change in a nation. It is these very powers that
    mark these individuals as blooded.

    Now, I would think other rulers, non-blooded leaders and such, would
    exist, but would not get the label of "Regent." Technically, a Kobold
    clan leader within some uncivilized forest would be a regent of sorts,
    but in game terms, he is just an unblooded ruler. The same could be
    held true for all organizations outside the "blood." They, in and of
    themselves, are worthy of notice, but they will never be able to
    compete with the divine like powers of the blood regents. Where a
    true Regent need only spend some gold to muster up armies (that
    intangable aura drawing normally reluctent people to take up arms),
    an unblooded ruler would have to rely on gold and mercenary units,
    in most cases, well beyond that a normal regent would have to use.
    Perhaps a truly charismatic unblooded individual could arise and
    stir the populous in his or her favor, posing a true threat to the
    Regent. Then again, don't you think this ruler of divine ability would
    notice such a thing and, well, accidents have been known to
    happen...

    Well, I have rambled overly long already... One of the great things
    about Birthright is that the possibilities are endless. Each DM
    has the right to rule individually as best suits their campaign.
    Collectively, we can aid each other (as DMs or Players) come to
    decisions and understanding that would otherwise be difficult alone.

    Looking forward to others' thoughts on the above,
    Bret

  5. #25
    Bret W. Davenport
    Guest

    Unblooded regents

    > Oh, and what happens when said unblooded ruler marches armies in said
    > blooded regent's domain, thereby contesting the little blooded
    > lordling's holding(s)? End result, the blooded regent is on par now
    > with the unblooded ruler! The guy has no advantage now, does he? :-0
    >

    Okay. Before I mention the mystical and divine power that a Blooded
    Regent has over non-blooded. Taking my example of mustering troops,
    and the idea of the inexplicable draw they have on the populous, wouldn't
    it, therefore, follow that when an invading army would suddenly find there
    would be defections to the other side when that "pull" occurred. Soldiers
    who had been loyal (or well paid) suddenly realize the "error" of their
    current ways. Suddenly, this "usurper who was abusing his strength of
    arms" didn't look so good, while the current regent who "shines with an
    aura of confidence and purpose" appears much more satisfactory as a
    leader. If you read the book, The Iron Throne, a quick reference to
    Michael Roele power to motivate and draw people to his cause would
    be an example of this. People who might otherwise despise or avoid
    having to aid a regent, would do so willingly and happily. Thus, this
    overly powerful mercenary with his horde of men-at-arms would find
    his influence and power greatly diminished when he came face to
    face with the undeniable pull of the Blooded Regent.

    I know you hate having these Blooded Regents treated as gods, but
    remember, this is a fantasy setting. The "Blood" IS from the gods, and
    to a lesser extent, the powers that were wielded, the influence that was
    a divine right, has transferred with them. No offense, if you want a more
    realistic world there are others available that would better suit the idea
    of a commoner rising up from meager heredity to rule a world. The
    whole premise behind Birthright is just that - the Birthright. If you take
    away that foundation, you undercut the whole purpose to the world.

    Another 2 Gold Bars from the mind of,
    Bret Davenport

    Feel free to spend your own GB to contest it -grin-

  6. #26
    Brandon Quina
    Guest

    Unblooded regents

    > This might also explain why peasants are now 'more free' in
    > Anuire/Brecht/wherever - the unblooded people are finally becoming
    > tired of those people who think that 'divineblood' is a requirement to
    > rule! Doesn't this sound familiar? I can think of many historical
    > examples concerning democracy and suffrage, etc., where this *exact*
    > arguement brought out those cherished ideals we in the RW hold today.

    Yes, but our real earth rulers couldnt PROVE that they had
    divine powers from the gods.

    The priests have to use their divine priestly godly powers
    to /let/ the kings rule. Thats about as close to the god
    coming down and saying 'you can be king' as you can get.

    Even the kings are able to do things that are miraculous.
    They can use their rule action, and channel some of the divine
    power they get from their lands onto it, and basically make
    ruling alot easier.

    Imagine how easy it is to rule when you have bursts in baby
    production, a decline in the death rate, plentiful food, and
    people working extra hard. The population increases that
    regents can cause in the course of a year is completly amazing,
    to the point of being MIRACULOUS.

    Worse-- they can, with enough 'divine power' have this happen
    every time.


    If our kings were 'blooded'-- earth would still be a monarchy.






    - --
    (lore@tmgbbs.com) \|/// Zzzzzzzzzzzz
    Brandon Lance Quina (- -)
    ICQ Number: 6809944 ---ooO(_)Ooo---

  7. #27
    Jim Cooper
    Guest

    Unblooded regents

    Bret W. Davenport wrote:
    > >
    > I know you hate having these Blooded Regents treated as gods, but
    > remember, this is a fantasy setting. The "Blood" IS from the gods, and
    > to a lesser extent, the powers that were wielded, the influence that was
    > a divine right, has transferred with them. No offense, if you want a more
    > realistic world there are others available that would better suit the idea
    > of a commoner rising up from meager heredity to rule a world. The
    > whole premise behind Birthright is just that - the Birthright. If you take
    > away that foundation, you undercut the whole purpose to the world.
    >
    > Another 2 Gold Bars from the mind of,
    > Bret Davenport
    >
    > Feel free to spend your own GB to contest it -grin-
    >
    Um, perhaps there's a little misunderstanding here. I don't hate
    blooded characters, I don't have anything against bloodlines et. al. I
    DM a regular birthright campaign just like everyone else, blooded
    regents and all. I see that my language was too strong when I wrote
    replies to these threads. I completely believe the stuff you said, what
    all the other people have said about these topics (I can agree with most
    of them, too), and I love BR more than anything else TSR puts out. My
    intention was not to change Birthright into something that it is not!

    I was only posting conjecture to this list dealing with seeing regency
    only from a blooded person's perspective; to start anyone who has
    wondering why unblooded regents are so scarce in this game into
    considering how they (unblooded persons) could own a corner of this
    world. As I got to thinking more about this topic, I began to see that
    being unblooded isn't so bad after all! Many adventure possibilities
    started to show themselves, all stemming from the rich backround the BR
    world gives us players. For instance, the peasants of Anuire seem to be
    a lot more 'free' than one would normally see in a feudalistic world,
    and one explanation could be that they are beginning to demand more
    freedom from a small minority that considers itself the creme de la
    creme of society solely on having a bloodline. There is an adventure to
    flesh out from a 'Matter of Justice' random event if I ever saw one!
    Lots more ideas starting popping into my head, and I just thought when
    Brandon posted stuff on a unblooded kobold regent submitting himself to
    a blooded thief in order to gain regency, "why?" Why would an unblooded
    person undercut his authority to another person, thereby validating the
    myth that blooded people are 'natural' rulers?

    I am perfectly willing to concede the point that bloodlines give a
    person a 'natural ability' to affect their surroundings, that blooded
    people have a 'presense' surrounding them, and all of that. When I
    thought about this though, I thought - wait a minute, wouldn't that suck
    for a rogue character (or even other character classes), when people are
    always aware of you and alert that you are some kind of special person?
    THEN I thought that maybe only certain bloodlines give one that sort of
    presense; perhaps Brenna's bloodline (for instance) and certain others
    are more 'recessive' (if you will), since Brenna's bloodline can't have
    Divine Aura and some other power abilities. This would make sense,
    considering Brenna's background. I could imagine that not a few blooded
    persons would want to keep their 'divinity' secret, that perhaps blooded
    people could exercise some control over their 'aura'. I dunno. This
    was why a tried to answer those posts from an unblooded person's
    perspective, trying to keep them short because all of my posts seem to
    be long.

    "Regency does not confer honesty, nobility, or a sense of responsibility
    upon a ruler" - a snip from an excerpt in one of the adventures in
    Legends of the Hero Kings. When I read that the other day, that seemed
    to click with me, and I got thinking that these questions will directly
    impact my section of the OCP - the fundamental question being, what
    exactly is regency and what is its role in the game?

    Again, I say I have nothing against the game, its rules, nor anything
    else related to BR - this list has been one of the more active and
    enlightening ones I have had the privelege to interact with. Woof, I
    think I am going to be taking a less active role with this list in the
    future - maybe there's something as to why Carrie remains a devouted
    lurker ... :-|

    Here's to hoping that more on unblooded people will see the light of day
    in the upcoming Book of Regency,
    Darren

  8. #28
    Bret W. Davenport
    Guest

    Unblooded regents

    Jim Cooper wrote:

    > Um, perhaps there's a little misunderstanding here. I don't hate
    > blooded characters, I don't have anything against bloodlines et. al. I
    > DM a regular birthright campaign just like everyone else, blooded
    > regents and all. I see that my language was too strong when I wrote
    > replies to these threads. I completely believe the stuff you said, what
    > all the other people have said about these topics (I can agree with most
    > of them, too), and I love BR more than anything else TSR puts out. My
    > intention was not to change Birthright into something that it is not!

    Perhaps I came across strongly, but I did truly mean no offense =)I was just pointing out that if
    you really wanted a world where any
    average run of the mill joe can become king through luck, circumstance
    or hard work, then there are so many other worlds where that is
    more plausible. To try to take the known and sensible world and plug
    it in to Birthright just wouldn't work. It would seem that as soon as
    you begin to question the ability and source of the powers those of
    Bloodlines hold, you begin to question the very fabric of that particular
    gaming environment. Make regency a commoners right to claim on
    par with the god-imbued "blooded," and you completely alter the entire
    concept that the world was based on.

    TSR wasn't trying to create a realistic world with defined parameters.
    It was offering us a chance to either DM or play in a world where the
    "normal" role-play was no longer the norm. Where Hercules and
    other "godlings" could exist. In essence, where mortals could walk
    with the thunder of the gods as their echo. I thought it an interesting
    concept, and to add the rules for regency, mass combat, and more,
    made the whole project that more intriguing and attractive.

    Your points about being blooded not making you noble or righteous
    is a good one. But in my one example, a diabolical blooded regent
    would appeal to the mercenary (and his defection) because his
    persona (and that intangible power) would suddenly seem more
    relevant to the greedy merc (etc).Again, it's not that actual definition
    is needed, just the realization that some undefinable powers (divine)
    are at work.

    Bret

  9. #29

    Unblooded regents

    In a message dated 98-03-07 16:01:09 EST, you write:

  10. #30
    bloebick@juno.com (Benja
    Guest

    Unblooded regents

    Well, I guess it's time to throw in my GB worth of opinion on this
    subject. ;)

    I have to say I'm from the 'old school' of gaming, in which rules are
    used as rough guidelines, and the concept of story lines is more
    important. I'm going to approach the subject with this in mind.

    I think it is fairly obvious from the rules that only blooded regents can
    collect RP. I don't see any arguments there. The arguments come from
    whether or not an unblooded person can be a regent. I don't see why not.
    Before Deismaar no one was blooded, and there were a lot of regents
    then, maybe more than currently, because there hadn't been a unifying
    force previous to Roele. Every lordling with a town and a populace was a
    regent. Thus, unblooded regents are possible.

    But then the argument wanders on to whether or not a nonblooded regent
    could stay regent. To this I would also say "yes, caveat". Anyone who
    is shrewd enough and full of resources will be able to hold onto their
    belongings until someone more shrewd and resourceful takes them away. If
    no one tries, or if no one is more shrewd, then the original person
    maintains possession. So, if an unblooded kobold manages to take control
    of a province in the Five Peaks and then kills off all contenders, the
    kobold can stay in control. If an orog chieftain, who happens to be
    blooded, moves in and pounds the offending kobold into stew, then
    obviously the kobold isn't regent anymore. If the kobold wisely tricks
    the orog into a trap and prevails, demoralizes the remainder of the
    orogs, then the kobold stays. The kobold, through no expense of RP, can
    either stay regent or fail to be regent.

    However, according to the rules, some far off force could use RP to move
    in and take over from the poor, unblooded kobold. But in a more
    realistic game, the current regent could prevent this. How? Simply run
    about, scour his lands of foreign influence, and kill off anyone who
    doesn't obey him. This wouldn't be using RP to prevent aggression - it
    would be using character actions to stop it. If you think about it, a
    racial champion who is constantly running around smashing up anyone who
    disagrees with him or his racial objectives would be pretty darn popular
    with his species. This would help keep the unblooded kobold in power,
    and keep out orogs, goblins, gnolls, or even those stinky humans. Who
    would want to say "Yeah, I'm in the Royal Human Civil Police, and I'm
    here to make sure that good King Arglebargle the Magnificent (plug to the
    BR playtest!!) is well liked" when there is a really unhappy kobold with
    a mob behind him saying "King Arglebargle stinks, I'm in charge, and what
    do you have to say about that?" Methinks that all those poor servants
    sent to support King Arglebargle's reign would either run away or get
    squished, thereby ending the RP influence in the province. No matter how
    much RP the foreign representative spends, if all his servants get
    killed, it won't work.

    But why would any kobolds in there right mind follow Grak Unblooded when
    they could support Dukor Divineblood? Because Grak kicked Dukor's butt,
    that's why. If Dukor kicks Grak's butt, then Grak is dead (these are
    kobolds we're talking about!) and Durok takes over - end of argument.
    But we're interested only if Grak wins. In this case people will still
    fear him (and his reputation will increase from kicking divine bloodline
    butt!) and obey Grak's edicts. The same thing happens in human lands.
    If a local hero continually manages to foil all attempts to remove him
    from regent, then he stays the local hero and regent. If he ever fails,
    then it's all over. The unblooded regent may even obtain some blooded
    individuals who think the unblooded regent is just swell, and follow him
    fanatically. They might use their RP (if they get any) to support this
    unblooded regent simply because the unblooded regent is a good person to
    have in command.

    Well, that's what I think. It is realistic to have an unblooded regent,
    even in the current days where most seemingly are blooded. It doesn't
    have to be that way, in my opinion, even if it is the easiest. I
    apologize for the length of this posting and if it tends to ramble some.
    I'm in the midst of responding to 96 messages, and I'm thinking about a
    lot of things.

    Benjamin

    __________________________________________________ ___________________
    You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
    Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
    Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Unblooded
    By Sorontar in forum Main
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-14-2009, 05:27 AM
  2. Unblooded Regents
    By Magian in forum The Royal Library
    Replies: 39
    Last Post: 07-29-2002, 02:51 PM
  3. Unblooded Regents
    By Morten Helles in forum MPGN Mailinglist archive 1996-1999
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-28-1997, 11:41 PM
  4. Unblooded Regents
    By Darkstar in forum MPGN Mailinglist archive 1996-1999
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 09-27-1997, 07:24 AM
  5. RE: Unblooded Regents
    By Dustin Evermore in forum MPGN Mailinglist archive 1996-1999
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-26-1997, 07:15 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
BIRTHRIGHT, DUNGEONS & DRAGONS, D&D, the BIRTHRIGHT logo, and the D&D logo are trademarks owned by Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and are used by permission. ©2002-2010 Wizards of the Coast, Inc.