(d20 Atlas) Deciding on Regent's Vitals

[Angelbialaska]

Originally posted by Thomas_Percy+Jan 21 2005, 12:04 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Thomas_Percy @ Jan 21 2005, 12:04 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Osprey@Jan 21 2005, 07:00 AM
In general, my philosophy is to build NPC&#39;s on a similar level to PC&#39;s. Meaning, "If I were this guy, how would I construct my own advance?" By doing this, one helps to ensure that major NPC&#39;s are challenging and vital characters in the campaign, not half-baked walkovers. An 8th level NPC should be as challenging an opponent (or as strong an ally) as an 8th level PC in terms of stats and power. What makes the PC&#39;s stand out isn&#39;t their stats or brilliant min-maxing, but the choices they make, the ideas they concoct, their ability to look at the big picture and plan accordingly. That&#39;s the true stuff of Birthright heroes.

A problem remains the same: magic items.
If I give PCs many items and don&#39;t give NPCs, NPCs will be weak.
If I don&#39;t give items to PCs and NPCs they will be helpless in combat with DR monsters. One awnshegh with DR (or worse savage-species-like PC with DR) defeat all domain.
If I reduce monster&#39;s DR, they will not be legendary, untouchabke by peasants, "immortal" beasts - they can be killed by a mob. [/b][/quote]
I don&#39;t know what level you&#39;re on, but I know that the party I&#39;m in has a Cleric and that Cleric has come to love a spell like Greater Magic Weapon. It&#39;s a level 4 Cleric spell (Level 3 for Wiz types), lasts 1/hour per caster level and makes your weapon magical, so it can overcome magic damage reduction. Keep an Align Weapon (Cle2) and there&#39;s few creatures that you can&#39;t defeat. Remember that you can achieve much of the same through spells like you can with magic items.

[Athos69]

Originally posted by Osprey@Jan 20 2005, 11:00 PM

I would give Heirl 3 levels of Fighter and 4 levels of Noble to adequately describe the mix of military ability and statecraft.

That&#39;s a rather weak mix, don&#39;t you think? He gets one extra [combat] feat and +1 BAB, maybe a few extra HP...and loses 12 ranks of skills and his 2nd favored region (which is also why he has +4 on the Southern Coast). He would be greatly weakened as a ruler by this, IMO.

In general, my philosophy is to build NPC&#39;s on a similar level to PC&#39;s. Meaning, "If I were this guy, how would I construct my own advance?" By doing this, one helps to ensure that major NPC&#39;s are challenging and vital characters in the campaign, not half-baked walkovers. An 8th level NPC should be as challenging an opponent (or as strong an ally) as an 8th level PC in terms of stats and power. What makes the PC&#39;s stand out isn&#39;t their stats or brilliant min-maxing, but the choices they make, the ideas they concoct, their ability to look at the big picture and plan accordingly. That&#39;s the true stuff of Birthright heroes.

Yes, it certainly could be, but I see the progression as being Nob 1, Scion 1, Ftr 1, Nob 2, Ftr 2, Nob 3, Ftr 3 <takes power as Duke>, Nob 4.

If the character is supposed to be both a capable military commander *and* a canny politician, it justifies the capabilities of the character, and purposely does NOT min-max, a concept I tend to shy away from even in PCs that I run. This leaves open the possiblities that he could take Ftr 4 (and get a bonus feat) or Nob 5 at the next level of progression, depending on what skillset is used most during the intervening time. It gives DMs some flexibility when running their own campaigns.

[The Jew]

Originally posted by Angelbialaska@Jan 21 2005, 04:29 AM
Make that Noble/Fighter if you want to multiclass him, otherwise he lose 12 skill points because first level is as the much less skilled fighter.

Thanks, that is what I meant

[Osprey]

A problem remains the same: magic items.
If I give PCs many items and don&#39;t give NPCs, NPCs will be weak.
If I don&#39;t give items to PCs and NPCs they will be helpless in combat with DR monsters. One awnshegh with DR (or worse savage-species-like PC with DR) defeat all domain.
If I reduce monster&#39;s DR, they will not be legendary, untouchabke by peasants, "immortal" beasts - they can be killed by a mob.

I sympathise. In truth, I don&#39;t run a low-magic BR campaign for precisely this reason - it&#39;s difficult to make it compatible with the whole 3.x D&D system of challenges.

Also, D&D character level progression is, IMO, paced so that while your PC is not gaining levels, at least they are getting some interesting new toys. Simple but effective as a game design.


On the flip side: I&#39;ve run some other low-magic fantasy campaigns that I&#39;ve really loved. However, to make a truly low magic setting you have to take out not just most of the magic items, but most of the spellcasters, too, especially those with blatant and dramatic effects.

A really good low-magic campaign makes anything magical either subtle and mostly un-noticed, or an outright unbelievable occurence (like a vision,trip, or dream), which the human mind rationalizes in all sorts of fun ways.

Birthright got it half right: they made wizards rare (except among elves). They should have made spellcasting clerics equally rare. As part of the world&#39;s historical and current settings, this would make blatant magic fairly unusual if not rare. The priest with faith healing really IS a wondrous discovery, much like stumbling on a wizard in the wilderness. Magicians and bards, village wise-women, mystic hermits - these would be the more typical magic-users - magics that are subtle, invisible, tricks. A little herbalism and alchemy can explain (and disguise) an awful lot. There aren&#39;t many of these spells (even bard/magician/adept) beyond 0 and 1st level in D&D, unfortunately.

If great magic is rare, then magic items become rare by default. I&#39;d let potions be the only "typical" magic items a mystic might make and sell, and then very rarely(perhaps once in a wizard&#39;s lifetime) some special item of power is created through an arduous series of mystic or arcane rituals of crafting, empowering, consecrating.

Another dose of realism to lower a setting&#39;s magic: even magical items don&#39;t stay intact forever, be it the fault of the corrosion, decay, abuse, or the mebhaighal simply being reabsorbed into the earth over the years.

D&D as a system isn&#39;t just mechanically ill-suited to a low-magic setting, the whole psychology of the game is geared toward high fantasy. Spells are usually miraculous (and visibly dramatic) in effect; monsters are common, diverse, and almost all of them far outstrip humans in natural ability; to compete with these monsters, humans must use lots and lots of magic, both spells and enchanted items.

In a truly low-magic world, monster CR&#39;s would need to be raised significantly - the higher the CR of a monster, the more magic items and spells are assumed to be had by the PC&#39;s. High monster AC&#39;s and DR (many of which are DR xx/Magic) mean most fighters need enchanted weapons to hit, high SR means dedicated casters must be in the party to have a chance of hitting it with magic, and incredible offensive and magical powers mean the PC&#39;s must have magically-high AC&#39;s and saving throws to not get pulverized.

The consequence of a low magic setting is that those who DO have strong spellcasting or potent magic items become dramatically better at whatever their magic affects, &#39;cause no one else has that sort of power except monsters. That&#39;s fine if your game tends toward monster-fighting and dungeon crawling, but in a human-dominant BR setting such characters will very quickly out-compete most of their own race.

I&#39;d rather keep it challenging, whatever level of magic exists. If your PC&#39;s have magic items, their human opponents need a few items, too, to be competitive. If your party has mages and clerics, there need to be some counters to these, which usually means enemy mages or clerics. Either that, or the enemy must always be higher level.

[Osprey]

Yes, it certainly could be, but I see the progression as being Nob 1, Scion 1, Ftr 1, Nob 2, Ftr 2, Nob 3, Ftr 3 <takes power as Duke>, Nob 4.

If the character is supposed to be both a capable military commander *and* a canny politician, it justifies the capabilities of the character, and purposely does NOT min-max, a concept I tend to shy away from even in PCs that I run. This leaves open the possiblities that he could take Ftr 4 (and get a bonus feat) or Nob 5 at the next level of progression, depending on what skillset is used most during the intervening time. It gives DMs some flexibility when running their own campaigns.

I hear what you&#39;re saying. It&#39;s a recurring design dilemma: do you build NPC&#39;s to challenge the min-maxers? Then they become exceedingly difficult for the non power-gamers. Build NPC&#39;s on a roleplaying basis, the min-maxer PC&#39;s kick their butts.

I tend to prefer the former, you the latter. I&#39;d rather an NPC be challenging to anyone, because in my experience as a DM there are always some power gamers in the group of PC&#39;s. D&D encourages this mentality (see previous post re. monsters and CR&#39;s).

Now, as far as Heirl Diem is concerned, I think the Nbl5/Ftr2/Sc1 suggested by the Jew would be a reasonable compromise. You&#39;ve posited that Heirl Diem has only gained one character level in his 8 or so years as duke. I think it more likely that since becoming duke he has gained most of his upper character levels, and that these would be noble levels gained through dealing with regent-type issues.

So it would have been Nbl 1, Sc 1, Ftr1, Nbl 2, Ftr 2 <becomes duke> Nbl 3-5. So 6th, 7th, and 8th levels gained over the last 8 years.

This would also help to justify developed (high-rank) rulership skills.

Osprey

[The incredible, edible Phil]

I personally think it&#39;s best to write the NPC&#39;s (or PC&#39;s) history first and then depending on how the writing goes, make stats from there.

Back to Heirl Diem however, is there any instance where he actually leads an army into battle? I can imagine he is an excellent strategist BUT green when it comes to tactics. Of the other npcs in Diemed, none seem to be in a position to have taught the duke or aided him in becoming what he is today. Note that warrior duke could also mean he&#39;s got a good weapon arm .

On the other hand, let&#39;s take the example of Roesone: The regent has access to help from several war-hardened fighters of higher level that could have served as mentors or instructors, somewhat more military experience (skirmishes with Ghoere, the frontier like nature of Roesone) and a more precarious position militarily where the regent must devote prioritize warcraft over other matters of statecraft.

Another example would be Gavin Tael: A strong military tradition coupled with the fact he has participated in many battles and wars.


All things considering, I think Heirl is missing Master Administrator as a feat. It does say he managed to clean up his court and the corruption of his administration during the first few years of his reign. If the theme that you are going for with Diemed is that they rise from the ashes, then giving them a strong power base (what his enemies other than Ghoere and Avanil don&#39;t have) would serve more than just making him an ubber general.

[Osprey]

Back to Heirl Diem however, is there any instance where he actually leads an army into battle? I can imagine he is an excellent strategist BUT green when it comes to tactics. Of the other npcs in Diemed, none seem to be in a position to have taught the duke or aided him in becoming what he is today. Note that warrior duke could also mean he&#39;s got a good weapon arm

A lot of strategy skills for nobility can come from study and simulations, but it&#39;s true: there&#39;s no replacement for good hard experience. I expect Heirl&#39;s had some experience, both before and after becoming a regent, fighting the occasional border skirmish, dealing with raids from the Spiderfell, and the occasional uprising by disgruntled peasants or lords. So long as these things happen only on a small scale, they probably aren&#39;t worth mentioning but can be assumed as part of his real experience. I mean, he had to get to 8th level somehow, right, and as a warrior that means he MUST have had a good deal of combat experience. In D&D, all the training in the world won&#39;t get you to 8th level, and it would be bad RPG character design to say he got some levels as a fighter and a bunch of combat feats mainly through regent actions.

Perhaps no living NPC&#39;s are good teachers, but who were Heirl Diem&#39;s teachers? Was it limited only to kin, or did he recieve tutelage elsewhere (like from mentors in the Imperial City)? This is something simply not mentioned in the published material, which gives us some room to play. But his published description does say he&#39;s a cunning strategist, so we really have to give a nod to that at least. However, if the general consensus is he&#39;s not a real warmaster, then perhaps it&#39;s OK to ditch the Military Genius feat. However, I&#39;d say keep his Warcraft skill pretty high.

All things considering, I think Heirl is missing Master Administrator as a feat. It does say he managed to clean up his court and the corruption of his administration during the first few years of his reign. If the theme that you are going for with Diemed is that they rise from the ashes, then giving them a strong power base (what his enemies other than Ghoere and Avanil don&#39;t have) would serve more than just making him an ubber general.

I actually had Master Administrator as one of his original feats, then decided to drop it for one main reason: the province levels in Diemed are none too impressive, which suggests that in his 8 years as Duke Heirl has ruled them very little if at all. As a genius Master Administrator, why wouldn&#39;t he have done so already? The only justification is that he recently picked up this feat at 8th level as his [5th level] Noble bonus feat. Which would put him in a position to begin expanding Diemed internally, and start making his maintenance more affordable.

Osprey

[Thomas_Percy]

Originally posted by Osprey@Jan 22 2005, 06:48 PM
So long as these things happen only on a small scale, they probably aren&#39;t worth mentioning but can be assumed as part of his real experience.

How can we know it was a small scale? Maybe Diemed was occupied, Aerele sacked, maybe Spider tried to assassinate Heirl thousand times etc.?
When I&#39;m looking at "Ruins Of Anuire" - it looks like twelve duchies stayed within their borders with little changes 1,5 milenium - in a opposition&#33;&#33;&#33; to domain strategic system which allows to shift a borders like a snow in spring.

Perhaps no living NPC&#39;s are good teachers, but who were Heirl Diem&#39;s teachers? Was it limited only to kin, or did he recieve tutelage elsewhere (like from mentors in the Imperial City)?

In DMG we have generating towns guidelines. In a realm as large as Diemed, with 2 big cities, there are several 10+ level NPCs and hundreds of middle level.