Alternative take on wizard domains from Baker

[Witness3]

So, I've stumbled upon this interview to Rich Baker from the forums.

There is this bit that intrigues me:

RW: You and Colin McComb designed the boxed set for Birthright and the setting of Anuire. If you could design Birthright (the core boxed set) again, what would you do differently?

RB: Ironically, I’ve just been looking at Birthright for the first time in many years. If I could do it over? Well, in terms of realm rules, I think I would give Sources and ley lines to primal casters like druids or shamans, not to wizards. I’ve been playing around with an idea that wizards use Artifacts as a time of holding, and that there are a very small number of Artifacts in the setting—there are temple and law holdings in just about every province, but an Artifact holding is more like one or two per realm. I think I would also try to emphasize more conventional adventuring in the setting; the Ruins of Empire book spends a great deal of time and space providing data about what regents are where, but it doesn’t say much about where the adventure is or how the DM is supposed to employ that information. Finally, I think I would try to move a lot of realm management into roleplaying—make it less about the numbers, more about the characterization and interaction.

I wonder what the community thinks of this? Giving lay lines to druids or primordial shamans, and having artifacts as holdings. The idea intrigues me because wizards seem to be the slowest domain in growing, compared to the others. And powerful artifacts to control areas seem a cool enough idea to me.

I would go with something like this : an artifact has a level similar to holding, and may use its power in neighboring provinces with the caveat that each province of distance from the artifact would equal to 1 less level - a level 2 artifact in Ilien would allow to cast level 2 spells in Ilien, level 1 spells in Braeme / Caercas / Duerlin and Abbatuor. To cast a level 1 spell in westmarch, the wizard would have to move the artefact.

That's just an idea, of course. What would be your take in this?

[masterdaorin]

Sounds interesting, but I think it just overcomplicates things.

Divine spellcasters already have a type of holding to support them - giving them another type of holding, and worse, excluding arcane spellcasters from holdings - muddles things too much.

I like the notion that arcane spellcasters must think about the natural world, and how it all works together, in order to do the magic that they do.

What I think the problem is, is that druids should have be reclassified as arcane spellcasters in this setting...

But some ideas re: D&D die hard.

[masterdaorin]

Note also, BR already has something akin to artifacts - the natural sources of the land act as such.

There is also the idea of dragon bones and such being a type of source holding... but that was never fully detailed.

I suspect that is what Baker is nodding toward in this interview...

[Doyle]

Actually, that feels like a good alternative for a druid.
It has always felt odd that they would need to have 'nature temples', and would allow for the powerful elf druid type - not trying to gather followers, just looking after their forest.

The setting keeps arcane magic from the dwarves and divine from the elves. This works fine until you get to druids and rangers that should be available to both races.
I'm currently running a 5e Birthright campaign for two groups (one adult, one young teens) and decided to allow a third class of magic - 'natural' to represent the power of the land (which is rumoured to be sentient in some BR document I read). It would make sense that ley lines could be accessed as part of the natural world.

..and then there is Artificers...<sighs> ok, categorised as weird science and is as different from natural magic as arcane is from divine. <grumbles about 5e having too many magic options>

[Witness3]

Actually, that feels like a good alternative for a druid.
It has always felt odd that they would need to have 'nature temples', and would allow for the powerful elf druid type - not trying to gather followers, just looking after their forest.

The setting keeps arcane magic from the dwarves and divine from the elves. This works fine until you get to druids and rangers that should be available to both races.

As far as I know Dwarves are kept from magic classes only to be consistent with AD&D 2E rules, in which dwarves could not be wizards. Elves, on the other end, cannot be priest as of BR lore. 3E seem to allow dwarven mages.

I'm currently running a 5e Birthright campaign for two groups (one adult, one young teens) and decided to allow a third class of magic - 'natural' to represent the power of the land (which is rumoured to be sentient in some BR document I read). It would make sense that ley lines could be accessed as part of the natural world.

..and then there is Artificers...<sighs> ok, categorised as weird science and is as different from natural magic as arcane is from divine. <grumbles about 5e having too many magic options>

I would say that artifacts would be a great approach for an Artificier regent. They would focus on entrapping mebhaighl into artifacts that serves as focus for domain spells, basically having mobile holdings.

As for ley lines, I think the simplest solutions would be allowing "primal druids" to raise temple holding levels as they were source holding and allow the ley line mechanic, without actually changing or adding holding types. That would grant druids the power to channel the lands' will , so that they may perform ritualistic investiture while keeping a "primordial" feeling.

[Osprey]

I think Druids being Priests of Erik instead of just Druids screwed everything up from the beginning (and I think maybe Rich Baker was thinking something similar in hindsight). Let Priests of Erik be actual Priests / Clerics with temple holdings, who concern themselves with guiding humans in how they interact with nature, while their wilder cousins live in the wilds and tend and protect the natural places directly (and probably are a lot less tolerant of guilds and farm clearance for growing human populations).

I think it would be awesome if druids and mages competed for sources directly with the same mechanics, and elves could be druids and rangers as favored classes instead of wizards. Mages could represent the more human (originally draconic?) way of controlling nature through ritual and force of will, while druids would represent the elven style of service to nature as stewards and guardians. This would require a bit of historic re-writing, where dragons and their students would be the likely teachers of arcane magic, although certainly some unusual elves could have been the first students of dragons, and it's still possible humans could have learned from them (as bards and magicians in the beginning. Wizards/sorcerers would have only emerged among humans after Deismaar).

The idea that elves shouldn't have divine magic doesn't make sense to me. I simply think they don't like serving gods because they are themselves immortal divine beings, and so divine magic would best represent their innate nature and abilities, not powers granted by some external deity. As soon as you accept this premise, elven druid and ranger classes are a perfect fit for the Sidhelien. Also as elves are divine beings, this could still explain their ability to use true arcane magic without bloodlines, if that is desired (and how they would have been the first wizards / sorcerers learning from dragons long before humans arrived in Cerilia).

[Fizz]

I think Druids being Priests of Erik instead of just Druids screwed everything up from the beginning (and I think maybe Rich Baker was thinking something similar in hindsight). Let Priests of Erik be actual Priests / Clerics with temple holdings,

Well that's the thing. Birthright was designed / written for 2nd ed AD&D, and in that system druids are considered a type of specialty priest. It's only in editions after 2nd where this gets messed up (where clerics serve all deities except those of nature).

When Rich Baker did that interview, the current system was 4e, where every class had a power source. So his views in that interview may have been colored by that.

This would require a bit of historic re-writing, where dragons and their students would be the likely teachers of arcane magic,

Indeed. In that alternate history maybe the deity Erik doesn't exist at all, as Baker was referring to how Rjurik would be fundamentally different- led by nature rather than a deity.

The idea that elves shouldn't have divine magic doesn't make sense to me. I simply think they don't like serving gods because they are themselves immortal divine beings,

Immortal yes, but i'm not sure about "divine" applying to them. The ancient history claims they came into existence out of the raw elements, true beings of nature with no divine entity creating them. Personally i treat them as fey, rather than humanoids.

As soon as you accept this premise, elven druid and ranger classes are a perfect fit for the Sidhelien. Also as elves are divine beings, this could still explain their ability to use true arcane magic without bloodlines, if that is desired (and how they would have been the first wizards / sorcerers learning from dragons long before humans arrived in Cerilia).

It does seem odd that the magic of the land would not let one cast druidy-type spells. But if one allows that, then you have the opposite problem, where a blooded ranger or druid might claim he should be able to cast wizard spells. After all, in this scenario both wizard and druid magic are powered by the same stuff, mebhaighl, and thus no distinction.


-Fizz

[Sorontar]

You could always take it that druids and rangers work with nature for their spells, but mages corrupt and manipulate nature for their spells, and clerical spells ask for divine changes to nature for their spells. Of course, if you then also consider bards, artificiers, warlocks and sorcerers, it gets a bit more complex. Maybe, bards use music to confuse and be in harmony with nature (like mages but more trying to be one with nature, than be dominant over it), artificiers copy nature (so it is science, not magic), warlocks pollute nature with extraplanar powers, and sorcerers are a wierd side-effect of nature.

As to which of these can then use source holdings and leylines, I guess it is up to you.

Personally, I think too many classes in 5e have access to magic and rangers should have never been treated as having access to clerical spells.

Sorontar

[Fizz]

Personally, I think too many classes in 5e have access to magic and rangers should have never been treated as having access to clerical spells.

I whole-heartedly agree. One of the things that i like about Birthright is that magic is rare and special. If most classes can use magic the setting loses that special aspect. All the way back to the 2nd ed days, rangers in my campaign did not cast spells. I would find warlocks and artificers too overtly magical for my campaign, so i don't think i'd allow them even if i did play 5e.

But Runecasters from the 2nd edi Vikings Campaign Sourcebook... much more my style: subtle, difficult, rare, and distinct (not just borrowed spells from other sources).


-Fizz

[AndrewTall]

I briefly toyed with the idea thaat wizardly magic was powered by the seeming, basically the wizard was blurring the line between Cerilia and the Shadow/Spirit world, and using the seeming the then create the effect that they wanted in Cerilia.

That had the problem however of sources and ley lines being drawn of Cerilia - unless of course you chose to make them linked to the Shadow/spirit world.