Results 1 to 6 of 6
  1. #1
    Ian Hoskins
    Guest

    Law Holdings vs Loyalty

    On 29-Apr-97, TSRRich@aol.com set out across the seas with this message:

    - ->Actually, the rule about law holdings and loyalty changes are there to help
    - ->out the bad guys. Why should the Gorgon have to rule by popular consent? The
    - ->rules give him the ability to have his troops enforce his will throughout
    the
    - ->land, and the DM has a perfect rules explanation for why the black-clad
    - ->soldiers make the unhappy townspeople keep paying their taxes.

    Suprisingly the one evil PC in my campaign was the only one who levied
    resonable taxes on his people. He did so to keep the people happy while the
    suposed good characters burdened their people with severe taxes as soon as
    they controlled all the law levels in their kingdoms.
    One of my players is regent of Medoere and with his temple holdings and the
    severe taxes he has managed to gather together a massive army and is way more
    powerful than he should be. So I changed the rules about law holdings and
    loyalty changes slightly so that after a few turns of severe taxes they
    started rebelling.
    I still use the rules as attended for the evil realm, after all the people
    there are used to the actions of their regent. For the Gorgon's kingdoms most
    of the people under his control are goblins and Orogs and are used to the
    harsh rules he places on his followers.
    But for realms that are supposedly goodly, and regent who are supposed to act
    good toward the people (mainly my players) I have changed them to keep them a
    little bit more under control.

    - --
    Darkstar

    e-Mail: hoss@box.net.au
    Home Page: http://www.box.net.au/~hoss/index.html
    Page updates: http://www.box.net.au/~hoss/update.html

    From the Darkness we came
    And to the Darkness we must return.

  2. #2
    Diana L. Paxson
    Guest

    Law Holdings vs Loyalty

    In response to Darkstar (30-Apr-97) & He Who Spoke Before:

    > On 29-Apr-97, TSRRich@aol.com set out across the seas with this message:
    >
    > ->Actually, the rule about law holdings and loyalty changes are there to help
    > ->out the bad guys. Why should the Gorgon have to rule by popular consent? The
    > ->rules give him the ability to have his troops enforce his will throughout
    > the
    > ->land, and the DM has a perfect rules explanation for why the black-clad
    > ->soldiers make the unhappy townspeople keep paying their taxes.
    >
    > Suprisingly the one evil PC in my campaign was the only one who levied
    > resonable taxes on his people. He did so to keep the people happy while the
    > suposed good characters burdened their people with severe taxes as soon as
    > they controlled all the law levels in their kingdoms.
    > One of my players is regent of Medoere and with his temple holdings and the
    > severe taxes he has managed to gather together a massive army and is way more
    > powerful than he should be. So I changed the rules about law holdings and
    > loyalty changes slightly so that after a few turns of severe taxes they
    > started rebelling.
    > I still use the rules as attended for the evil realm, after all the people
    > there are used to the actions of their regent. For the Gorgon's kingdoms most
    > of the people under his control are goblins and Orogs and are used to the
    > harsh rules he places on his followers.
    > But for realms that are supposedly goodly, and regent who are supposed to act
    > good toward the people (mainly my players) I have changed them to keep them a
    > little bit more under control.
    >
    > --
    > Darkstar

    I'm of the opinion that the systems of Alignment and Domain Maintenance
    help in evening the odds for would-be hero-gone-conquerers.

    1) If a "good" regent is regularly abusing his people with heavy taxes
    and sending them off to die in wars against neiboring kingdoms, his/her
    alignment should come into question. A forced Alignment shift could
    severly mess with the straying hero if their a Paladin, Ranger or Priest
    (Gods tend to take a dim vew of High Priests who abuse their station).
    Even if ones class is not affected, allies formerly frendly may remove
    their support to those they feel they can no longer trust (to the extent
    that they could even join with the opposition out of fear for their
    safty!)

    2) Maintaining large Armies gets increadably expensive. Unless you have
    a lot of cash, the Maintenance Cost will bankrupt your kingdom in no
    time. Even if you've got $ to burn, letting your neibors know your
    filthy rich and "evil" enough to invade them is a good way to make the
    more greedy-minded willing to invade you while your armies are
    plundering elswhere...

    later...
    - --
    Grendel Tod

  3. #3
    Darkstar
    Guest

    Law Holdings vs Loyalty

    Brian Stoner wrote:

    > One of my players established a level 0 guild holding and then established a
    > trade route to the city of Anuire. This now brings in 7gb a turn and helps
    > support the military. Unfortunately, that character died and the player now
    > plays a character unrealated to his other, but the realm still brings in
    > extra cash. I though it was a brilliant move. It helped that none of the
    > established guilds opposed him.

    Of course if the 0 level holding had been contested by even one of the
    guilds in Anuire City then that holding would have been destroyed and
    with it would go the trade route.

    - --
    Darkstar

    e-Mail: hoss@box.net.au
    Home Page: http://www.box.net.au/~hoss
    Page Updates: http://www.box.net.au/~hoss/update.html

    >From the Darkness we came.
    And to the Darkness we will return.

  4. #4
    Cec Stacey
    Guest

    Law Holdings vs Loyalty

    > Brian Stoner wrote:
    >
    > > One of my players established a level 0 guild holding and then
    established a
    > > trade route to the city of Anuire. This now brings in 7gb a turn and
    helps
    > > support the military.

    Shouldn't that be divided in half between the lvl 0 guild and the guild in
    the Imperial city?
    .

  5. #5
    Brian Stoner
    Guest

    Law Holdings vs Loyalty

    At 06:27 PM 5/3/97 -0300, you wrote:
    >
    >
    >> Brian Stoner wrote:
    >>
    >> > One of my players established a level 0 guild holding and then
    >established a
    >> > trade route to the city of Anuire. This now brings in 7gb a turn and
    >helps
    >> > support the military.
    >
    >Shouldn't that be divided in half between the lvl 0 guild and the guild in
    >the Imperial city?
    >.

    I believe that the income is based on the average of the Province levels,
    not the guild levels. The route is from Caercas, Roesone (4) to The City
    (10). And thus the average would be 7.

    - -Brian

  6. #6
    Undertaker
    Guest

    Law Holdings vs Loyalty

    At 08:21 PM 5/3/97 -0700, Brian Stoner(bstoner@efn.org)wrote:
    >
    >I believe that the income is based on the average of the Province levels,
    >not the guild levels. The route is from Caercas, Roesone (4) to The City
    >(10). And thus the average would be 7.
    >

    I perfer basing TR income on Guild levels. It seems more sensable, and helps
    keep GBs under control. Particularly if they have to split the profit with
    another Guild. But thats just MHO.

    Undertaker, richt@metrolink.net

    "War is a matter of vital importance to the State;
    the province of life or death;
    the road to survival or ruin.
    It is mandatory that it be thoroughly studied."
    -Sun Tzu,(The Art of War)-

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. stabilization (was Holdings Loyalty)
    By Birthright-L in forum The Royal Library
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 04-25-2002, 06:34 AM
  2. Holdings Loyalty
    By geeman in forum The Royal Library
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 04-24-2002, 03:06 PM
  3. War & loyalty
    By Memnoch in forum MPGN Mailinglist archive 1996-1999
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-15-1999, 04:19 AM
  4. War & loyalty
    By Kenneth Gauck in forum MPGN Mailinglist archive 1996-1999
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-15-1999, 03:49 AM
  5. Lah Holdings vs Loyalty
    By L.Willett in forum MPGN Mailinglist archive 1996-1999
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 04-29-1997, 03:24 PM

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.