Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 43
  1. #21
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Nether-Netherland
    Posts
    308
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Originally posted by geeman@Jul 16 2004, 09:10 PM
    1. If population levels are really just the control of existing, unallied people then why should the process of gaining their loyalty (or just control over them) reduce the potential source level of the province?
    2. The "uncontrolled population" rationale also begs the question... why are holding levels limited to population level?
    3. Why can there be only one province ruler?
    Hear, hear! My sentiments exactly.
    <span style='color:darkgray'>&quot;I like to be passionate and sincere, but I also like to have fun and act like a dork... Geeks unite.&quot;
    &#160;</span>&#160;<span style='color:brightgray'>&#160;&#160;—Kurt Cobain</span>

  2. #22
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Hamburg, Germany
    Posts
    2
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    It&#39;s good to hear/see that my doubts about the Domain system are shared,

    Sorry for not being not so much up to date for the number of rulings allowed,
    but i think this downscales the problem only a bit.

    People have tried here to give rationales for how the population "increase" can be
    explained, but IMO geeman offered a sufficient reply to cast doubt on them. I am
    well aware that in the end the current domain system is basically a framework for
    ROLEPLAYING Lords, not really aimed at simulation. At least the published adventures strongly suggest this.
    But once you get past the conquering the whole of Anuire part -as e.g. in the computer game (in other world this is the equvialent of saving the world each adventure) - and
    want to try out small-scale intrigue, small feuds and other such concepts, the domain
    system mostly fails you: no tiers in the feudal system etc.

    Getting back to population, the numbers given in trhe BRCS are probably not aimed
    at simulation and verisimiltude. So let&#39;s say we could accept them as a rough basis:
    a level one province is about 1000 people.
    From there I could divide other populations levels in smaller units of about 1000 people.
    the second level of a province would the consist of 2 such units, the third of 3 etc.
    Thus a level 2 province has in summa 3 pop units, a level 3 contains 6 etc. The numbers thus obtained are along the lines of the BRCS table.

    I could model thus:
    - natural poulation growth
    - the effect mustering (i.e. turing craftsmen to soldiers) would have on the population of a province
    - a much more fine-grained "rule" action. I tried several approaches:
    a.) each rule action adds only one unit of population
    b. ) a rule action in aprovinve would only add to the chances of "natural growth"
    I was much in favour of b.) but players really want instant growth, so I adopted a version of a.)

    Such a system could keep a holding level system (& thus most of the Domain system), while giving a finer grained picture of the population.

    Whaddya think? Am I thinking in the wrong direction?

    Edit: Maybe we should hold a vote in the design forum if we want more simulation
    in the new BRCS v3.0 or if the keep the simple & easily usable system of old ........

  3. #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Nether-Netherland
    Posts
    308
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Originally posted by brechtdragon@Jul 30 2004, 06:07 PM
    Edit: Maybe we should hold a vote in the design forum if we want more simulation
    in the new BRCS v3.0 or if the keep the simple & easily usable system of old ........
    Simple? Easily usable? I think not&#33; :lol:
    <span style='color:darkgray'>&quot;I like to be passionate and sincere, but I also like to have fun and act like a dork... Geeks unite.&quot;
    &#160;</span>&#160;<span style='color:brightgray'>&#160;&#160;—Kurt Cobain</span>

  4. #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    aberdeen, scotland
    Posts
    282
    Downloads
    131
    Uploads
    0
    I have the rule province attracting people from neighbouring domains and while ruling once may be absorbed by multiple provinces ruling more than once may cause decreases in neighbouring provinces and related disagreements between regents as the work force is attracted away by another regents incentives.

    I also have each of the regions anduria etc slowly growing in population but wars and plagues can halt this growth or even cause a decrease in the pop of an entire area.

    In this way I even let guilds and churches rule provinces as they are capable of atracting people to the province for work or religion although I make it more difficult for them.

    I think this explains the pop inceases easily and makes for good roleplaying situations as regents fight to stop their people moving to a neighbouring domain.
    MORNINGSTAR

  5. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Victoria BC, Canada
    Posts
    368
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Originally posted by brechtdragon@Jul 30 2004, 09:07 AM
    It&#39;s good to hear/see that my doubts about the Domain system are shared,

    a level one province is about 1000 people.
    From there I could divide other populations levels in smaller units of about 1000 people.
    the second level of a province would the consist of 2 such units, the third of 3 etc.
    Thus a level 2 province has in summa 3 pop units, a level 3 contains 6 etc.
    <snip>
    Such a system could keep a holding level system (& thus most of the Domain system), while giving a finer grained picture of the population.
    Ony major problem with this is when you have mutiple regents holding the same type of holding in the province.

    A good example would be a Level 5 province, which by your reconing shuld have 15,000 people in it.

    Two temples vye for control of the souls there, one is a Temple 3 and the other is a Temple 2. Do they see to the spiritual needs of athe entire population? Do they, combined, have the same number of worshipers as the neighbouring province with a Temple 5?

    Nope.

    A Temple (3) would serve 6,000 souls, and a Temple 2 serves 3,000. In a province of 15,000, that leaves 6,000 who are wandering without guidance -- enough for another Temple 3, if we work holdings on pure numbers...

    Of course if we were to dictate that Holdings represent a fraction of the entire province, that leads us smack into another quandary -- Is a holding 1 in a Province 10 some five and a half times more productive than a holding 1 in a Province 1? We can&#39;t have that happening, or it will throw economics all to Hades...

    A possible solution in this latter problem is to say that in order to exert one&#39;s influence in a larger province, compete and extract the wealth, one has to spend more, be it advertising, wages, properties, influence, etc, which makes the scenario work out to roughly equal incomes, both GB and RP.
    "It may be better to be a live jackal than a dead lion, but it is better still to be a live lion -- and usually easier."

    - R. A. Heinlien, from The Collected works of Lazarus Long

  6. #26
    Senior Member Osprey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    1,475
    Downloads
    34
    Uploads
    8
    I think breaking down province levels into sub-levels is simply too much micro-management.

    Don&#39;t know if I ever posted this, but I decided if I am to run another campaign, I would make a simple rule.

    Rule Province may be attempted once per season. If it succeeds, the regent may not attempt to rule that province again until a full year has passed. Thus, a regent could rule (at best) 4 provinces in his realm up by one level each, but couldn&#39;t rule one province up by 4 levels in a year (an all-too-common phenomenon in my current campaign). I can live with a more widespread growth effect in a realm, but it&#39;s just too unbelievable when one province multiplies its population almost overnight.

    Osprey

  7. #27
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Victoria BC, Canada
    Posts
    368
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    I like that Osprey -- it works, is simple, is logical, and nixes an abuse of the rules.
    "It may be better to be a live jackal than a dead lion, but it is better still to be a live lion -- and usually easier."

    - R. A. Heinlien, from The Collected works of Lazarus Long

  8. #28
    Senior Member Osprey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    1,475
    Downloads
    34
    Uploads
    8
    I like that Osprey -- it works, is simple, is logical, and nixes an abuse of the rules.
    Thanks - I&#39;m thinking this might be a decent rule to introduce for the revised BRCS, when the time comes for some Ch 5 revisions (beyond what we&#39;ve introduced already).

  9. #29
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    61
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    25 people per square mile is not outrageous (early medieval England).

    200 people per square mile is the maximum rural for medieval (400 people per village ... above that and they can&#39;t grow enough food to support themselves unless they are in a river valley that floods ever year or six, and thus they become a town; a village takes up 2 square miles as 1 mile is the longest you want to walk every day to and from your jobsite from dawn to sunup and from sundown to dusk (half an hour)).

    From Braudel, "The Structures of Everyday Life":
    Remember that the average for the world in 1979 was 26.7 per sq km.
    Between 1300 and 1800 it was estimated at from 2.3 to 6.6 inhabitants per sq km.
    Also looking at where population was at 200 per sq km or more is less than 10% of the dry land area of the world.

    Looking only at those highly populated areas the following are figures in pop per sq km in 1600:
    Netherlands 40; France 34; Germany 28; etc.

    Daniel Defoe estimated in 1709 that 3 acres of good land or 4 of average land were required to support one man, allowing for crop rotation.

    Back to the Dwarf:
    If we take that figure of 3-4 acres per person, then since there are 640 acres in a square maile, and two square miles in a village, that puts maximum village population at 360-426. Of course these figure assume an entirely rural population with no cities. Therefore to support a city of 100,000 you would need a minimum of 300,000 acres (500 square miles) just to feed that population. Even if the farmers are running twice as many acres as they require to feed themselves we are talking 1,000 square miles. It gets worse.
    Since only 10% to 20% of the population was urban in medieval times we know that figure is off, so if the city is 100,000 there must be a rural population of 450,000-900,000. To feed than many people (aka, 600,000-1,000,000) you need 1,800,000-4,000,000 acres, or 2,812 - 6,250 sq miles. 6,250 sq miles is about 80 miles by 80 miles IFF nearly 100% of the area is devoted solely to agriculture (which is not possible). That means that the average distance to the city is 20 miles. Therefore gathering points (towns) are needed. The total town population should be at least equal to the city population. Now we are at 5,624-12,500 sq mi to support a city of 100,000. Food generally arrives in wagons pulled by horses or oxen, plows are pulled by horses or oxen, and so forth. Now we are at 11,248-25,000 sq mi. Accounting for rivers, hils, fens, and other waste lands (~25%) and, at maximum density, a minimum of 14,000 - 32,000 sq miles to support the one city.

    Note that this is with everything maxed out ... no woods (except in the 25% marginal lands) and no sheep. Real figures would easily start this going out even further and get figure down to 25 per square mile (light rural, possibly herding) to 150 per square mile (France, overcrowded).

    -Dwarf

  10. #30
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    60
    Downloads
    8
    Uploads
    0
    Good god... The numbers... oof... Seems that all this is based entirely on grain agriculture... what of fish, deer, apple trees, vinyards, corn, potatoes and all the other edible things under the sun?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

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.