Two Questions; How does Conquest work in BR? Can the unblooded govern?

[Outlaw Pope]

Hello! Second post here. And these are two big Qs I have had after reading the AD&D material.

How does conquest work? If leaders in Cerilia tend to be at one with the land, resonating with it, changing it by belief and being bound to it... exactly how do Scions take each others realms?

Do they have to kill one another? Deplete the other's bloodline? Can I physically take a domain and then be invested over the previous ruler? I know they could do vassalage or ransom, but that was pretty much explained in text.

Also - it made basic mention of it but can/do the unblooded ever start their own realms or societies? I am not really talking about peasant republics - but are there chiefs/kings/rulers who are struggling out there with no ability to magically manipulate the land but do things in a more... "old school" way?

Thanks for any responses.

[Magnus Argent]

Hello! Second post here. And these are two big Qs I have had after reading the AD&D material.

How does conquest work? If leaders in Cerilia tend to be at one with the land, resonating with it, changing it by belief and being bound to it... exactly how do Scions take each others realms?

Do they have to kill one another? Deplete the other's bloodline? Can I physically take a domain and then be invested over the previous ruler? I know they could do vassalage or ransom, but that was pretty much explained in text.

Also - it made basic mention of it but can/do the unblooded ever start their own realms or societies? I am not really talking about peasant republics - but are there chiefs/kings/rulers who are struggling out there with no ability to magically manipulate the land but do things in a more... "old school" way?

Thanks for any responses.

Hello, Outlaw Pope and welcome!

After a scion conquers a province, (s)he may be invested as its new ruler in subsequent action rounds. This would require the scion to remain in the province for the month and participate in an investiture ceremony which must be conducted by a priest regent with at least a Temple (1) holding in the province. (Its a free action for the priest unless the priest is personally investing himself with rulership of the province).

The key is the Investiture ceremony. This is what transfers the bond from one regent to another (sometimes willingly, sometimes not).

Attempting investiture is not guarantied to succeed and the current ruler of the conquered provinces is free to bid regency points to make it more difficult. Also, if there are other regents in the province whose holdings were not not contested during the province's occupation, they too are free to bid RP, either to support or oppose the investiture. In the case of a guild regent, this would likely only occur if the holding in question were fortified since a conqueror is able to destroy existing non-source holdings as a part of the occupation.

As a rule, unblooded individuals don't become domain rulers in the Birthright setting. I'm not sure if the source material specifically states that they *can't* but, as a rule, they don't. There were certainly leaders among the human tribes prior to Mt. Deismaar. But a blooded ruler with regency simply has too great of an advantage over one that doesn't.

[Fizz]

Welcome to the boards!

I think non-blooded characters can rule, but the nature of Birthright suggests they'd be at a significant disadvantage. The mechanics of this are not addressed in the core material. It is certainly a rare event. The one example i can think of offhand is the Hand of Azrai. She is the holder of the temples in The Gorgon's Crown, but is specified as not being blooded. So she is an example of a regent without a bloodline.

Regarding conquest, basically, there are a few ways that the mystical connection can be transferred; some violently, others not. Investiture is the main one, which I think Magnus covered it well.

If i recall correctly, bloodtheft can transfer it too. Or does that require a tighmaevril weapon? I'd need to double check that.


-Fizz

[Doyle]

If i recall correctly, bloodtheft can transfer it too. Or does that require a tighmaevril weapon? I'd need to double check that.
-Fizz

I don't know if bloodtheft replaces investiture, but it certainly removes someone that might contest an investiture. Of course if the previous regent had designated an heir, the problem is transferred, not removed. I think that might be where the tighmaevril weapon comes in.

[Fizz]

I don't know if bloodtheft replaces investiture, but it certainly removes someone that might contest an investiture. Of course if the previous regent had designated an heir, the problem is transferred, not removed. I think that might be where the tighmaevril weapon comes in.

Ah, just checked it. If a regent is killed through bloodtheft, the domain transfers to victim's heir. If the bloodtheft is with a tighmaevril weapon, then that connection is broken and the domain becomes uncontrolled.
I knew tighmaevril had an extra effect.

-Fizz

[Malphas]

Ah, just checked it. If a regent is killed through bloodtheft, the domain transfers to victim's heir. If the bloodtheft is with a tighmaevril weapon, then that connection is broken and the domain becomes uncontrolled.
I knew tighmaevril had an extra effect.

-Fizz

there is also an additional dimension to standard bloodtheft:
if the victim was last in line not only d you get 5 point to your blood score you also gain all accumulated RP. i imagine the last part to be true with tighmaevril as well.

as far as unblooded regents they kind of have to be possible (most blood s concentrated in cerilia and the world is big) but at a monstrous disadvantage against blooded regents.

[Magnus Argent]

there is also an additional dimension to standard bloodtheft:
if the victim was last in line not only d you get 5 point to your blood score you also gain all accumulated RP. i imagine the last part to be true with tighmaevril as well.

as far as unblooded regents they kind of have to be possible (most blood s concentrated in cerilia and the world is big) but at a monstrous disadvantage against blooded regents.

The defining quality of a Regent in Birthright is the ability to acquire and spend Regency Points so, technically, there are not and cannot be unblooded regents. But I do agree with you in that logic dictates the possibility of an unblooded ruler, at least in theory. You are correct in that such rulers would be at a horrible disadvantage when compared to a landed regent.

[Osprey]

There's no mechanical system for using the 2e Domain system without Regency points except for Creating a level 0 holding, and ruling a level 0 holding to level 1 (which both cost 1 GB but no RP). That's a specific loophole that allows a scion to become a regent without having any RP to start.

So aside from unblooded rulers having only level 0 and 1 holdings, you would need to invent a system for unblooded regents (or councils) to somehow gain and store regency points in order to use the 2e domain system.

It's worth noting that the BRCS system for 3.0/3.5e intentionally changed to a domain system that does not require RP to enact domain actions - RP are only spent to support or oppose appropriate domain actions. The change was for exactly the reason mentioned: so unblooded rulers could be included in the system, while still giving blooded rulers powerful advantages.

Having used this system, the downside is that regents spend way less RP than in 2e, and this leads to much faster bloodline growth by regents, and truly massive bidding wars on opposed actions. I have seen Contest realm actions targeting 5 holdings at once, where 100-200 RP is spent by each side.

The original system drains RP almost every turn in which regents are trying to grow their realms, and this dramatically slows bloodline growth and RP hoarding (which is good, because the 2e system has no RP storage limit!).

[Outlaw Pope]

Thanks for the replies and the welcome. That is a lot to think on.

I am currently in the middle of planning out a NWN (Neverwinter Nights) player world (at least attempt one)! Set in the Birthright setting in what will be obviously OC. I am not entirely planning on using a direct pull of the domains system as it will be sort of a background thing for players to be involved in and I am just trying to think how kosher it is for "normal" people to be involved in governance.

I did not see anything explicit forbidding it but the Bloodlines do seem to have a lot of advantages in doing it considering they are basically godlings communing with the world bones and their followers.

----

It does make me wonder if elves especially and maybe dwarves would need a bloodline either considering their very natural connection to things.

[Malphas]

I am just trying to think how kosher it is for "normal" people to be involved in governance.

I did not see anything explicit forbidding it but the Bloodlines do seem to have a lot of advantages in doing it considering they are basically godlings communing with the world bones and their followers.

----

It does make me wonder if elves especially and maybe dwarves would need a bloodline either considering their very natural connection to things.

oh that changes things a bit.

most realms have non-blooded aides (as well as more tangible advisors ans lieutenants). i even recall mention of unblooded nobles ruling a city/province in blooded regents name.