Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 40
  1. #21
    Birthright Developer irdeggman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Virginia Beach, Virginia
    Posts
    3,945
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    And I would also not have 2 levels of spells (battle/realm) with the same effect. That is there shouldn't be both a battle spell that cures a unit's hits and a realm spell that does the same thing. IMO battlespells are just an application of standard spells on a larger scale.
    Duane Eggert

  2. #22
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Blackgate, Danigau
    Posts
    87
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Another is, as you point out, to allow a non-blooded caster to have an effect on the battle. Many of the spells listed as Realm spells in the playtest document were battle spells in 2nd ed.
    Hmmm... While full wizards are rare, clerics are not. BR is somewhat low level, but there will be a few clerics high enough level to cast battle effect spells in any temple. That is a lot of clerics in battles, rather changes the battle system if they have an effect. I rather like the psuedo-realistic level of combat in BRs wars. Not so many wizards flying about and fireballing. Can think of knights and infantry making a difference, not like FR wars. While clerics arnt as flashy as wizards, do we want to open up battles to them?

    Cleric regents sure. But a dozen or more high level clerics in each temple would change the flavor of battle if we took them into account, IMO.

  3. #23
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Blackgate, Danigau
    Posts
    87
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    On further reflection, I am not totally opposed to the idea of non-blooded clerics having an effect on units in or out of battle. I am opposed to one cleric being effective or game changing.

    Rather I am thinking of a system like:
    A temple (5) or large [a big one] can place priests with a military unit. Similar to the train unit action, clerics join the unit and give it some bonus. This bonus could be balanced with other bonueses that training a unit can give, in both cost and benifit. What the bonus is might depend upon the faith, set when the joint unit if formed. The bonus might also be chosen differently for each battle, to reflect clerics ability to chose different spells each day. The names of these different bonuses could correlate with the names of standard mass spells. Mass bull's strength give +2 melee, mass cure a faster heal rate for the month, etc.

    Single clerics healing unit hits or giving bonuses dont fit well in the abstract domain system. How do you decide how many 7th level clerics there are in a province? How many RP or GB do they cost? Are they free because they work for the church already?

    If you agree the proliferation of NPC cleric's individually affecting battles in large numbers is bad, there is still the question of what a high level PC cleric can do. Perhaps allow them to join one of these joint cleric/army units. Costs might be waived as well as training, but only because a single PC exception will not break the system.

    I think this kind of system (training-like bonuses, def+, tough+, etc.) helps give temple holdings a place in battle. Much flavor and balanced fun could be got out of the system. A high level PC taking the place of a team of clerics will feel useful, powerful, and cool. But a single casting of a mass divine spell would not be represented, because the abstract domain level and the D&D individual level needs lots of hand waving and abstraction to play well together.

    Balance first, BR flavor second,......then maybe realism, IMO. Otherwise we are playing Forgotten Realms in its silly glory...

  4. #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    883
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Danip schrieb:



    >This post was generated by the Birthright.net message forum.

    > You can view the entire thread at:

    > http://www.birthright.net/forums/ind...ST&f=36&t=2792

    >

    > Danip wrote:

    >

    >

    >------------ QUOTE ----------

    >Another is, as you point out, to allow a non-blooded caster to have an effect on the battle. Many of the spells listed as Realm spells in the playtest document were battle spells in 2nd ed.

    >-----------------------------

    >

    >

    >

    >Hmmm... While full wizards are rare, clerics are not.

    >

    At least not in 3E of the game. In 2E Clerics while having no need to be

    blooded, were also rarer than in other worlds, as every cleric was a

    specialty priest of a god, who had not only to fulfill the simple Wisdom

    9 requirement of the 2E PHB, but also additional requirements for each

    god, e.g.

    Priests of Haelyn needed to fulfill Wisdom 9, Strength 9, Charisma 12.



    That reduced the statistical number of possible clerics in 2E Birthright.



    > BR is somewhat low level, but there will be a few clerics high enough level to cast battle effect spells in any temple. That is a lot of clerics in battles, rather changes the battle system if they have an effect.

    >

    In ANY temple? With the exception of the presented, exceptional

    characters, according to the Book of Priestcraft only 1% of all NPC

    clerics in temples are level 6+.



    Another reason why not so many priests could influence battles with

    massive battlespells was that in 2E those priests simply would not get

    all spells granted by their gods, due to the sphere system which

    restricted which cleric could cast which spell, and as the battlespells

    were loosely based on the normal spell, restricted which battlespell

    could be cast.



    >I rather like the psuedo-realistic level of combat in BRs wars. Not so many wizards flying about and fireballing. Can think of knights and infantry making a difference, not like FR wars. While clerics arnt as flashy as wizards, do we want to open up battles to them?

    >

    >

    IMO I would like to see clerics in battle - however I would definitely

    not like to see 100 clerics of Nesirie casting "Hammer Storm" because in

    3E all clerics can cast all spells from the Cleric list...

    bye

    Michael

  5. #25
    Birthright Developer Raesene Andu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    South Australia
    Posts
    1,357
    Downloads
    1
    Uploads
    0
    Most priests aren't going to be a high level so most aren't going to be able to cast the high level spells.
    Let me claim your Birthright!!

  6. #26
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Blackgate, Danigau
    Posts
    87
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    A debate about how many high level clerics there are in 3e BR temples is exactly what I want to avoid. A certain level of abstraction needs to be maintained for domain level action to work. You start getting PCs arguing that their temple should have X NPCs who can cast Hammer Storm... Then the Law regent complains because his high level NPCs dont get powerful battle effects....

    Slippery slope....

  7. #27
    Senior Member Thomas_Percy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    139
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    About chapter 7
    The intricacies of nature are complex – it is impossible for a regent to know which source holdings will be destroyed when province level increases. The DM should determine the ownership of a destroyed source level randomly.
    Imho a wizard knows what he has. He created holding in the source place, maybe ley line. He knows history and abilities of the place.
    If an aristocrat destroys source holding by increasing the province level, he can cooperate with a mage and choose what to destroy.

    Source manifestations are difficult to find. By their very nature, manifestations are most likely to occur in the most remote and untracked areas of a province. Locating a source manifestation is a difficult and time-consuming process.
    Where is game mechanics: skills, DCs?
    Where are special abilities and quailiteis of the source beyond DR, SR and regeneration?

    A mage may only attempt to claim a source (0) in a manifestation already claimed by another mage if the other agrees to allow the action to succeed.
    I don't understand. Does old holder of the source knows at will as a free action? How can he forbid another wizard to create a 0 level holding there?

    Ley lines are a non-transferable domain asset.* When a regent dies, her ley network is destroyed.* Ley lines cannot be used or invested to another caster. The only exception to this rule is the use of the ley lines by the regent's lieutenant as part of a lieutenant domain action.
    Why a ley line can be used by lieutenent and cannot be invested as a inheritance?

    The targets of a realm spell must be in the same province as the caster throughout the casting of the spell. Spells that affect military units only affect military units that are stationed in the target province for the entire month.
    It makes a realm spells useless in the warfare, because enemy commaner will shift his units to avoid month time of stationing in one province. I think, realms spells can be prepared ahead of time (a month) and casted as a standard or full round action exactly when are necessary.

    and by the way:
    Druids are able to cast divine realm spells as if the unclaimed source holdings in the province were temple holdings under their control.
    Druids' holdings can be rated as sources - for every purpose.

  8. #28
    Birthright Developer Raesene Andu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    South Australia
    Posts
    1,357
    Downloads
    1
    Uploads
    0
    Originally posted by Thomas_Percy@Feb 16 2005, 07:22 PM

    Imho a wizard knows what he has. He created holding in the source place, maybe ley line. He knows history and abilities of the place.
    If an aristocrat destroys source holding by increasing the province level, he can cooperate with a mage and choose what to destroy.
    Realistically, a source is destroyed because the population increase in the province polutes it. For example, a wizard in a 4/3 province may have a source holding in a forest near on of the major settlements. if the province increases in size, then it is likely that the people of this settlement will need more wood, resrouces etc, so this holding is the most likely one to be destroyed, instead of one located in the wilds of the province somewhere.

    If a wizard provides advice to the landed regent, then it is quite likely that he can direct the source level destruction to occur to a rival's sources not his own. The landed regent could issue a decree forbidding logging in the forest or something like that. Of course, no true wizard would allow any uppity landed regent to get away with something like this, and would give any who tried a smart clip around the ear for destroying the magical potential of the land.

    A mage may only attempt to claim a source (0) in a manifestation already claimed by another mage if the other agrees to allow the action to succeed.
    I don't understand. Does old holder of the source knows at will as a free action? How can he forbid another wizard to create a 0 level holding there?
    I agee, this is a significant change to the rules, as it would mean that a wizard who controlled all the source manifestations in the province could stop any another wizard for building a new holding.

    The only way this would work is if you rules that there were more source manifestations than the magic potential level might suggest, but only a certain number could be tapped as sources at any one time. As sources are onyl really tapped for power when a realm spell is cast though, this sort of arrangement is very difficult to justify.

    Why a ley line can be used by lieutenent and cannot be invested as a inheritance?
    I'm divided about this ruling, it only seems to be useful to prevent wizarding families like the Aglondiers building up a vast network of ley lines. It would be better to re-introduce the old 1 rp/ley line maintenance.

    Wizard should also be able to loan their ley lines and sources to any allied wizard they want as well, I don't see any good reason why they can't do this. They could in 2E, so why drop it now.

    The targets of a realm spell must be in the same province as the caster throughout the casting of the spell. Spells that affect military units only affect military units that are stationed in the target province for the entire month.
    It makes a realm spells useless in the warfare, because enemy commaner will shift his units to avoid month time of stationing in one province. I think, realms spells can be prepared ahead of time (a month) and casted as a standard or full round action exactly when are necessary.
    I disagree, realm spells are very useful in warfare, very useful indeed. Like everything though, you just need to use them properly.
    Let me claim your Birthright!!

  9. #29
    Birthright Developer irdeggman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Virginia Beach, Virginia
    Posts
    3,945
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Thomas_Percy,

    I have to ask how familiar you are with the 2nd ed BR rules? This is important becasue most of my responses assume a knowledge of them.



    QUOTE
    The intricacies of nature are complex – it is impossible for a regent to know which source holdings will be destroyed when province level increases. The DM should determine the ownership of a destroyed source level randomly.

    Imho a wizard knows what he has. He created holding in the source place, maybe ley line. He knows history and abilities of the place.
    If an aristocrat destroys source holding by increasing the province level, he can cooperate with a mage and choose what to destroy.
    Per the BoM only a wizard can tell where a source is. Even if a regent controls the source he can’t locate it unless he is a wizard. Thus raising the population level or razing the forest, etc. is an indiscriminate process and will destroy all the sources within the area affected. If the regent is also a wizard then he can indeed tell exactly where to raise the area and thus keep his sources/manifestations the last affected.


    QUOTE
    Source manifestations are difficult to find. By their very nature, manifestations are most likely to occur in the most remote and untracked areas of a province. Locating a source manifestation is a difficult and time-consuming process.

    Where is game mechanics: skills, DCs?
    Where are special abilities and quailiteis of the source beyond DR, SR and regeneration?
    Good point this needs to be better spelled out. But locating the source is essentially the same a creating a source holding and would follow the same mechanics, or at the very least real similar ones.



    QUOTE
    A mage may only attempt to claim a source (0) in a manifestation already claimed by another mage if the other agrees to allow the action to succeed.

    I don't understand. Does old holder of the source knows at will as a free action? How can he forbid another wizard to create a 0 level holding there?
    In 2nd ed a regent (any type) knew immediately if his holdings were being threatened. It was part of his tie to them. In 3.5 mechanics I would make this a reflexive action (i.e., an immediate free action) that is indeed automatic (at least normally there may arise circumstances that change this). This would be similar to a Spot check used to determine if an ambush was going to happen, it is not a conscious character action it is a reflexive one. Now this issue about not creating a ) level source is also a bit strange since it doesn't apply to other holding types and IMO the same restrictions should apply to both cases. No IMO any regent with a similar type of holding instinctively knows when another holding of the same type is undegoing any type of action (e.g., rule, create, contest, etc.). This is part of the mystical tie a regent has to his holdings.



    QUOTE
    Ley lines are a non-transferable domain asset. When a regent dies, her ley network is destroyed. Ley lines cannot be used or invested to another caster. The only exception to this rule is the use of the ley lines by the regent's lieutenant as part of a lieutenant domain action.

    Why a ley line can be used by lieutenent and cannot be invested as a inheritance?
    The Lt rule is a little strange and I’m not real certain I agree with it myself. The fact that ley lines couldn’t be transferred was spelled out in the BoM. The only way they could be was if the regent performed a ley link action which temporarily transferred the ley line to someone else and the regent no longer had access to it for the duration of the action.



    QUOTE
    The targets of a realm spell must be in the same province as the caster throughout the casting of the spell. Spells that affect military units only affect military units that are stationed in the target province for the entire month.

    It makes a realm spells useless in the warfare, because enemy commaner will shift his units to avoid month time of stationing in one province. I think, realms spells can be prepared ahead of time (a month) and casted as a standard or full round action exactly when are necessary.
    Mostly see the thread on battle magic and realm magic so we can figure out where the two types fall.

    and by the way:

    QUOTE
    Druids are able to cast divine realm spells as if the unclaimed source holdings in the province were temple holdings under their control.

    Druids' holdings can be rated as sources - for every purpose.
    ??? I don’t where you are going with this one. Basically a druid can increase the effectiveness of his temple holdings in this manner. He does not gain a source per say and cannot perform any actions that require a source, e.g. ley lines, arcane realm spells. A druid casts divine spells and not arcane ones. This was done to reflect that druids have their power base in low populated areas and thus are severely hampered in their ability to cast realm spells.
    Duane Eggert

  10. #30
    Senior Member Thomas_Percy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    139
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Originally posted by irdeggman@Feb 16 2005, 05:44 PM
    I have to ask how familiar you are with the 2nd ed BR rules?* This is important becasue most of my responses assume a knowledge of them.
    I think my personal skill at rules does not matter.
    As I understand, You are a new rules maker.
    You can change everything You want to make Brt better, compact, simple and full of new possibilities for PCs.
    If old rules limit Your imagination, ignore them.
    I think one of the greatest victories of D&D 3E over AD&D is to eliminate most things incoherent, complicated and everything what limits our imagination.

    Imho conversation about "what X wrote on the page Y at the accessory Z" is a waste of time, because it's a past, and You are the man who makes the future of Brt.

    We are thinking Brt is the best campaign ever. But Brt is a bankrupt. So Your task is to answer "why Brt is a bankrupt", remove old mistakes and create new quality.

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.