Results 1 to 4 of 4
  1. #1
    Alain Pouliot
    Guest

    Trade Routes (long winded - sor

    - ----------
    > From: Peter Hodge
    > To: Birthright Mailing List (E-mail)
    > Subject: [BIRTHRIGHT] - Trade Routes (long winded - sorry)
    > Date: 31 mai, 1998 06:16
    >
    > Hey all!
    >
    > I am just curious why a number of people on this list (and, by extension,
    other Birthright players) are worried that the Trade Route rules are
    unbalanced. Sure, they may bring a large amount of money (and RP for thief
    regents) but a DM should have absolutely no trouble keeping them under
    control. For starters, a trade route is not all that immediately easy to
    set up. Firstly the route has to connect provinces that have different
    terrain types (so, for example, a trade route between the Imperial City and
    Endier which would normally generate a whopping 8GB/turn is not possible as
    both "provinces" are the same terrain - rolling plains or something very
    similar), or another culture (Anuire to Khinasi, for example). Secondly, a
    road has to link the two provinces (admittedly this isn't much of a
    barrier). Lastly, the establishment of a trade route requires a success
    roll that interested parties can oppose (rival guilds, for example - if
    there are two or three guilds already with int!
    > erests in either of the provinces involved, the regent could find
    succeeding at the roll a VERY expensive prospect indeed). Plus there is the
    number of trade routes/province rule - when this rule is combined with the
    different terrain requirement, the road requirement and the need to have a
    guild holding at each end of the trade route, they can be quite difficult
    to set up.
    >
    > Once a trade is established, it is almost laughably easy to disrupt it -
    a simple decree action by the lawful "ruler" of one of the provinces
    connected by the trade route can neutralise the route as long as the
    ruler's law holding is greater than the guild holding of the owner of the
    trade route. The decree action is a "free" action so it can be used as many
    times as desired (as long as the GB hold out as least). Also, contesting
    either of the guild holdings that support the trade route shuts it down, as
    the does the conquering of either province connected by the trade route.
    The BR rulebook also says that random domain events (banditry, rebellion,
    etc) can also shut down the trade route. With all these options at a DMs
    fingertips, I have found it relatively easy to keep a lid on the amount of
    money taken from trade routes.
    >
    > However, that said, I understand that a large number of BR campaigns
    where the PCs are regents have the regents either allied or at least very
    friendly with each other (please correct me if I'm wrong here). In this
    sort of environment, with say half a dozen allied countries busily creating
    trade routes back and forth and the party's spellcasting regents busy
    augmenting them with the various realm spells that affect such things, the
    GB situation could easily get way out of hand simply because the
    allied/friendly/whatever regents of each domain are not going to oppose
    their friends trade routes. Controlling trade routes in this sort of
    situation is obviously difficult.
    >
    > However, I would like to voice some opinions related to this. Please
    remember that these are only my opinions and experiences and I am not in
    any way trying to suggest they are better or correct!
    >
    > In my campaign, the PCs (all of whom are regents) all play regents in
    Anurie (they are the rulers of Roesone, Medoere, Tuornen and Endier - I
    love the domain sourcebooks!) and they anything BUT allies. Generally, they
    do not actively plot against each other (I do not actually want them to go
    to war!) but they do not help each other except where their own interests
    and goals are served. I have found that situations like out of control
    trade routes simply don't crop up simply because the cost of setting many
    of them up is simply to exorbitant thanks to the opposition of whoever's
    territory they are trying to move into. As a case in point, the regent of
    Endier embarked on a trade network program (as if Endier doesn't make
    enough GB every turn anyway!) early on in the game. It fizzled before it
    really got off the ground because almost every single regent in southern
    Anuire strongly resisted the idea of the Endieran regent getting his claws
    on any more trade domination than he alre!
    > ady had. He was able to get a couple up and running by making deals with
    some regents and outmanoeuvring others but his grand plan didn't even come
    close to succeeding. The other barrier in the way of my regents doing
    things such as setting up trade routes, is that each trade route requires a
    domain action to accomplish (and maybe even more if the success roll fails)
    and that about half of my regents' actions are spent reacting to the
    actions of other regents or events in general, and alot of the remaining
    time is spent on more immediate matters, like ruling holdings, mustering
    troops, etc. For most of my players, Trade Routes are a long way down on
    the list of things to do I have found that I have had no trouble in keeping
    things that way (the possibility of invasion from a neighbouring realm is
    almost guaranteed to bring trade route building to a screaming halt!).
    >
    > Well, sorry to have rambled on for so long. The point of this whole rant
    is that I personally have no problem with the trade route rules as they
    stand.
    >
    > Peter "Dragon" Hodge
    > --
    > e-mail: dragon@uq.net.au
    > Website: Dragon's Lair (http://www.uq.net.au/~zzphodge)
    > ICQ: 2863795
    >
    I it 1-0 for Peter against the monty haul campaign. When a DM face a
    problem with the trade routes, i must think about how can he change this.
    If he cant, he must think about his past action.

    Snag
    >> To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the
    line
    > 'unsubscribe birthright' as the body of the message.

  2. #2
    Trankel Al Ker
    Guest

    Trade Routes (long winded - sor

    At 03:09 AM 1/06/98 -0500, Shade wrote:
    >-------
    >Actually I'm glad that you brought this up. I'm new to DMing and playing
    >Birthright (except in PBeM) and my campaign is now on the fifth domain turn
    >(5.1, 552 MR). The players are Roesone, Medoere, Ilien, El-Hadid, HMA, and
    >a custom law/guild domain on Caelcorwynn island. The 2 guilders (EH and
    >Caelcorwynn) bring in well over 20 GB a turn primarily because of their
    >trade routes (Caelcorwynn just built 3, about 15 GB and EH has 3). EH is so
    >wealthy that he just spent 60 GB on his birthday party and invited regents
    >from all over Cerilia to attend. Now, do the rest of you think this is too
    >much money? Roesone is paying 15 GB maintenance and that's all he brings in
    >every turn! What's to stop these two guys from raising a huge army and
    >trampling Roesone or any other landed regent?
    >
    >This really isn't an issue because all the players are on good terms with
    >each other and are about to sign an alliance, except Medoere who the rest
    >don't like. But then what is to stop them from gradually taking everything
    >over? At the last gaming session they were looking at the map and trying to
    >decide how they should divide up Mieres once they invade it.
    >
    >And I knew how destructive trade routes could be so I put very stringent
    >restrictions on TRs. First I require a diplomacy action, then I allow the
    >construction of a SINGLE trade route (can't create TRs as a realm action in
    >my campaign). And I have the guild level determine how much money the TR
    >brings in (to prevent Ilien from making a 0level guild in order to build 3
    >trade routes).
    >And on top of this I have all the restrctions in the Rulebook.
    >
    >Tell me, what am I doing wrong?

    Well, perphas you should make that your random events also affect the trade
    routs.



    Trankel Al Ker
    Lord of the Brotherhood of the Black Tulipan

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    317
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0

    Trade Routes (long winded - sor

    >Once a trade is established, it is almost laughably easy to disrupt it - a
    simple decree action by the lawful "ruler" of one of the provinces
    connected by the trade route can neutralise the route as long as the
    ruler's law holding is greater than the guild holding of the owner of the
    trade route. The decree action is a "free" action so it can be used as many
    times as desired (as long as the GB hold out as least). Also, contesting
    either of the guild holdings that support the trade route shuts it down, as
    the does the conquering of either province connected by the trade route.
    The BR rulebook also says that random domain events (banditry, rebellion,
    etc) can also shut down the trade route. With all these options at a DMs
    fingertips, I have found it relatively easy to keep a lid on the amount of
    money taken from trade routes.
    >
    >However, that said, I understand that a large number of BR campaigns where
    the PCs are regents have the regents either allied or at least very
    friendly with each other (please correct me if I'm wrong here). In this
    sort of environment, with say half a dozen allied countries busily creating
    trade routes back and forth and the party's spellcasting regents busy
    augmenting them with the various realm spells that affect such things, the
    GB situation could easily get way out of hand simply because the
    allied/friendly/whatever regents of each domain are not going to oppose
    their friends trade routes. Controlling trade routes in this sort of
    situation is obviously difficult.
    >
    >However, I would like to voice some opinions related to this. Please
    remember that these are only my opinions and experiences and I am not in
    any way trying to suggest they are better or correct!
    >
    >In my campaign, the PCs (all of whom are regents) all play regents in
    Anurie (they are the rulers of Roesone, Medoere, Tuornen and Endier - I
    love the domain sourcebooks!) and they anything BUT allies. Generally, they
    do not actively plot against each other (I do not actually want them to go
    to war!) but they do not help each other except where their own interests
    and goals are served. I have found that situations like out of control
    trade routes simply don't crop up simply because the cost of setting many
    of them up is simply to exorbitant thanks to the opposition of whoever's
    territory they are trying to move into. As a case in point, the regent of
    Endier embarked on a trade network program (as if Endier doesn't make
    enough GB every turn anyway!) early on in the game. It fizzled before it
    really got off the ground because almost every single regent in southern
    Anuire strongly resisted the idea of the Endieran regent getting his claws
    on any more trade domination than he alre!
    >ady had. He was able to get a couple up and running by making deals with
    some regents and outmanoeuvring others but his grand plan didn't even come
    close to succeeding. The other barrier in the way of my regents doing
    things such as setting up trade routes, is that each trade route requires a
    domain action to accomplish (and maybe even more if the success roll fails)
    and that about half of my regents' actions are spent reacting to the
    actions of other regents or events in general, and alot of the remaining
    time is spent on more immediate matters, like ruling holdings, mustering
    troops, etc. For most of my players, Trade Routes are a long way down on
    the list of things to do I have found that I have had no trouble in keeping
    things that way (the possibility of invasion from a neighbouring realm is
    almost guaranteed to bring trade route building to a screaming halt!).
    - -------
    Actually I'm glad that you brought this up. I'm new to DMing and playing
    Birthright (except in PBeM) and my campaign is now on the fifth domain turn
    (5.1, 552 MR). The players are Roesone, Medoere, Ilien, El-Hadid, HMA, and
    a custom law/guild domain on Caelcorwynn island. The 2 guilders (EH and
    Caelcorwynn) bring in well over 20 GB a turn primarily because of their
    trade routes (Caelcorwynn just built 3, about 15 GB and EH has 3). EH is so
    wealthy that he just spent 60 GB on his birthday party and invited regents
    from all over Cerilia to attend. Now, do the rest of you think this is too
    much money? Roesone is paying 15 GB maintenance and that's all he brings in
    every turn! What's to stop these two guys from raising a huge army and
    trampling Roesone or any other landed regent?

    This really isn't an issue because all the players are on good terms with
    each other and are about to sign an alliance, except Medoere who the rest
    don't like. But then what is to stop them from gradually taking everything
    over? At the last gaming session they were looking at the map and trying to
    decide how they should divide up Mieres once they invade it.

    And I knew how destructive trade routes could be so I put very stringent
    restrictions on TRs. First I require a diplomacy action, then I allow the
    construction of a SINGLE trade route (can't create TRs as a realm action in
    my campaign). And I have the guild level determine how much money the TR
    brings in (to prevent Ilien from making a 0level guild in order to build 3
    trade routes).
    And on top of this I have all the restrctions in the Rulebook.

    Tell me, what am I doing wrong?

  4. #4
    Tim Nutting
    Guest

    Trade Routes (long winded - sor

    I guess to me the biggest limited to a trade route is that nice little line
    in the rulebook stipulating that each end of the route must be in a
    different terrain type. Its well hidden, but it is there. I commonly run
    in the Roesone/Aerenwe corner, and actually the only provinces suited for
    trade out there are the swamps in Osoerde, Bellamie, and the Erebanien
    provinces, none of which are very high in level.

    I also begin games with established guilders already having the juicy
    contracts. For instance, El-Hadid and Guilder Kalien allready own the big
    contracts to Ilien, Endier, and Imperial City. Darien Avan controls his
    own pet guilder, and virtually nothing is open there... the list goes on.

    Remember that other NPC regents want the money just as badly as the
    players, and they WILL play dirty to get it. I've used Orthien Tane of
    Roesone to assassinate one guilder PC who was just too much of a pain in
    his butt.

    Merry Moneymaking!

    Tim Nutting

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. Trade Routes
    By JakobLiar in forum The Royal Library
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 03-15-2010, 08:19 PM
  2. Trade Routes
    By abeard@zebra.net (Adam B in forum MPGN Mailinglist archive 1996-1999
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 06-02-1998, 02:09 PM
  3. Trade Routes (long winded - sorry)
    By Peter Hodge in forum MPGN Mailinglist archive 1996-1999
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-31-1998, 10:16 AM
  4. Trade Routes & Law
    By Hibbs, Philip in forum MPGN Mailinglist archive 1996-1999
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-21-1997, 07:33 AM
  5. Trade Routes
    By Sepsis in forum MPGN Mailinglist archive 1996-1999
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-23-1997, 05:44 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.