Advancing the Timeline

[Osprey]

I DO like the notion of characters needing to cultivate their reputations but why require this only of spellcasters? If wizards need to worry about what the rabble thinks about their spells, why don't warriors need to worry about what the rabble things about their swords?

While I don't quite hold with masterdaorin's 'fear all magic if you're normal' version of Cerilia, I have run into multiple instances in my own campaigns where fear and uncertainty are pretty rational reactions to magic use - particularly as PC spellcasters get higher level, and higher-level NPC casters also come into focus.

The most blatant form this takes is "Magic as a Weapon of Mass Destruction."
In my (Pathfinder) campaign, the PCs eventually reached 17th level and above. This included 2 Clerics of Cuiraecen as well as an elven Wizard, but it turns out that in 3e clerics at the highest levels are actually more powerful army killers than wizards (defying all the common stereotypes) due to a single 9th level spell: Storm of Vengeance. This spell has a 360' radius (and this can be doubled with a metamagic rod of Greater Widen Spell, which doubles the radius to 720'!).

A 2nd 9th level spell is Gate: which allows the caster to summon an outsider with up to twice the caster's level in HD. The cleric of Cuiraecen could thus summon a Solar (whose hit dice can be anywhere from 20 to 50 or more, depending how advanced they are, each with spellcasting powers of a high level cleric themselves - including storm of vengeance!).

Long story short: The Militant Order's 2 arch-clerics and the 2 Solar archangels they summoned could together conjure 4 Storms of Vengeance at once - allowing them to engulf and kill almost the entire 12,000-strong army of Ghoere invading Mhoried (encamped in a palisaded camp, and thus unable to quickly escape) in less than 30 seconds.

So as a DM I started talking about the rippling waves of consequence as news spread:
Magic like this completely shuts down regular warfare with mundane troops, and its actual use upon the battlefield - much like the use of atomic bombs in WWII - completely changes warfare forever in Cerilia.

It also deeply divided public opinion about the MoC: on the one hand, any who already disliked them now had ammunition to fan the flames of fear and paint the Stormlord (the MoC paladin regent and liege of the 2 clerics who were his Lts) as an arch-villain and mass murderer, honorless and utterly undeserving of Cuiraecen's favor.

On the other hand, a Mhoried zealot claimed to have visions from Cuiraecen. The man, a middle-aged farmer whose lands were pillaged and family abused by the invading Ghoereans - preached that the Stormlord was the ultimate Champion of Cuiraecen, chosen by the Stormlord's own hand to deliver the people of Mhoried - and indeed all the faithful of Anuire - from all the villains and ravagers of the world. At long last, the gods had sent a savior to deliver them from the great evils of the world.
(The PCs later kill the Spider and Rhuobhe, which greatly bolsters these claims and multiplies the faithful believing in this prophecy far beyond the borders of Mhoried).

Beyond these popular opinions and the deep political and religious divides that are formed, this also shifts the basis of military power being defined more by who has the greatest spellcasters on their side than whose armies are biggest or better-trained. It doesn't really matter if your 20,000 troops are typical 1st level warriors, or elite veteran warriors or fighters averaging 2nd-4th level - most battle magic is going to kill or severely wound them in a single hit.

High-level magic undoubtedly dominates average people in almost every way - be it overt battle magic or subtle enchantment magic like charm, suggestion, and domination. If you are a mundane person unlikely to survive or resist magics like this, you are definitely going to fear them!

But- much like WMDs - if you are part of the team that has them - you are going to be really damn glad your team has them, even if you fear your enemies have them too! So fear also mixes with respect and admiration for that power when used for the benefit of you and yours.

If as a DM you have people react tribally, I think you are going to capture the essential human reaction. If they trust the users of great powers to act for their benefit, they will probably be a fan. If they feel they cannot trust said users, they will probably be a hater. Fear of acting against them might still keep the haters in line, but such folks will always be ripe for recruitment by enemies of the magic-users who convince them there is a way to control or be rid of them.

Final Note: Even if you don't have high-level casters in your campaign (though you as a DM would have to erase most of the D&D magic norms as well as the high-level NPC casters in the setting material to not have them at all), a 5th level wizard can throw a fireball at a tight-packed infantry formation and annihilate several dozen hardened soldiers in the blink of an eye. So you can consider it pretty likely that the average soldier will really dislike, fear, and/or hate magic just like a 20th century soldier would hate few things more than land mines, artillery, flak, snipers, or poison gas - some of the things that make it so survival on the battlefield is less about skill and more about luck.

Allow a Wand of Fireballs in your game, and you can multiply this firepower many times, even in the hands of a 1st level character if they can use the wand!

Likewise: Charm Person is a 1st level spell. Suggestion is even more potent in its ramifications, especially in political situations, and domination most of all...particularly when you realize what it could do in combination with a ceremony of Investiture! You can be sure that having a good magician, mage, cleric, bard, and/or magic items protecting a regent becomes an absolutely essential tool to ensure a regent's safety and free will in a world where such magic exists - nevermind the potential of such magics to mess with your enemies!

Different editions of D&D keep revising the magic more than any other part of the game because they know it is the most unbalancing aspect of D&D, a fact that becomes more apparent as characters rise in level.

As a DM you can either roll with it and adapt your game to suit, or you can try to trim most of it out to try and keep your game as mundanely human and low-magic as possible. I think there are pros and cons to both styles of game.

My own preference (highlighted above) was to try and use D&D (and later Pathfinder 1e) mostly as-written and instead adjust the psychology in the setting to fit a world where such powers exist. This made for a lot less changing of the game rules as a DM and for players, which allowed me to concentrate on the already-immense workload of running a game that has detailed adventures and a full domain-level game. Heavily customizing the D&D rules has always felt like too much extra work on top of everything else a full Birthright game entails.

There's certainly a lot of issues keeping PCs and powerful NPCs relatable to us regular humans as they become high-level superheroes - a problem that exists in every version of D&D and many other fantasy RPGs. But at the end of the day, all of my players have enjoyed imagining what that might be like, just as huge numbers of people enjoy good superhero, anime, and other high fantasy stories. It's not the only kind of good fantasy, but it's definitely a viable one, just as gritty low-magic fantasy can make for good stories of a different type.

[Osprey]

For example, I find that D&D could be so much more, but the generic setting often falls short. BR comes close, but even it holds to the generic ideas of D&D too much, IMO.

I've been continuing to ponder your post and the style of game you prefer, and keep wondering: Is D&D really the best game system for what you are trying to achieve?

One of the very best systems I ever played (and ran for 2 years) was the Swedish RPG Drakar och Demoner. It's quite simple but extremely gritty and down-to-earth in the sense that characters are...always going to be pretty squishy as humans or similar species. Veterancy can help a bit, but mostly you increase skills with experience (including magic if that is your skillset), instead of inexplicably multiplying durability and developing superpowers.

It used to be that the game only existed in English, but recently a version of the game was created by Free League Publishing (Frialigan), and now includes an all-English version called Dragonbane. It's very reasonably priced as a starter box set or pdf, and I couldn't help but think it might make a truly awesome game system for adapting to Birthright.

[Fizz]

Well, isn't that the point - seeing a gnoll or a goblin as not a monster illustrates my point that these creatures have become "mundane" in D&D?

They should be seen as monsters - because they are. And scary ones at that. But veteran D&D players don't seem to have the appropriate response when confronting them, from what I've experienced.

In the case of goblins, individually, a goblin is no more frightening than an individual elf or dwarf, or human. So of course a seasoned adventuring party is not fearful of one. It is when they come in numbers that can make them scary. But that's no different than a party that has to face down an army of humans.

Goblins are a known quantity: they can be reasoned with, they trade with other realms, and a large percentage of the general population has either seen or dealt with them, and they can't do anything that is outside what ordinary humans can do. In all those senses, yes they are mundane.

The mystique and the magic is gone. And that's a pity. I've tried to figure out why - and my answer has boiled down to atmosphere and story factors.

That's ok for some monsters like goblins. They can play the "ordinary" villains. As you say, the true monsters, the ones that keep people up at night, are best exemplified by the awnsheglien. I'm with you there. I think having mundane monsters like goblins empahisizes how truly badass the awnsheglien are.

-Fizz

[Fizz]

While I don't quite hold with masterdaorin's 'fear all magic if you're normal' version of Cerilia, I have run into multiple instances in my own campaigns where fear and uncertainty are pretty rational reactions to magic use - particularly as PC spellcasters get higher level, and higher-level NPC casters also come into focus.

I've always liked that Birthright treats magic as not normal more than other settings. I agree that rarity or even lack of understanding does not equate to fear.

As Arthur C Clarke said, "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."

We can see this in our own world with various aspects of science and technology. Most people don't understand quantum mechanics or special relativity, yet the science of both goes into all our cell phones and computers and global positioning system respectively. To most people these are effectively magic devices.

That said, some science and technology nowadays is feared. 15-20 years back the big scare was that cell phones would cause brain cancer. And more recently the fear of vaccines was on the rise. The next big scare will probably be the rise of driving cars and AI. Will they prove worthy of fear, or will that fear abate like so many other new technologies before?

By and large, people fear what they don't undestand, but that's largely a gut reaction. Once it can be demonstrated as useful to them, that fear abates, even if the level of understanding does not increase.

Bringing this back to Birthright, i can totally understand that different cultures have different attitudes towards magic. No culture will be completely uniform of course- there are certainly some Vos who are curious in magic, and a few Khinasi who think magic will bring down society. But broad cultural generalizations seem logical to me, as the cultures of Cerilia are more isolated than our own world is.


-Fizz

[masterdaorin]

My own preference (highlighted above) was to try and use D&D (and later Pathfinder 1e) mostly as-written and instead adjust the psychology in the setting to fit a world where such powers exist. This made for a lot less changing of the game rules as a DM and for players, which allowed me to concentrate on the already-immense workload of running a game that has detailed adventures and a full domain-level game. Heavily customizing the D&D rules has always felt like too much extra work on top of everything else a full Birthright game entails.

There's certainly a lot of issues keeping PCs and powerful NPCs relatable to us regular humans as they become high-level superheroes - a problem that exists in every version of D&D and many other fantasy RPGs. But at the end of the day, all of my players have enjoyed imagining what that might be like, just as huge numbers of people enjoy good superhero, anime, and other high fantasy stories. It's not the only kind of good fantasy, but it's definitely a viable one, just as gritty low-magic fantasy can make for good stories of a different type.

Amen, brother.

I completely agree with everything you and Fizz have stated, btw.

All I'm trying to say here is that this style I have developed has worked for the people I game with, so that what it is.

Hey - I've been playing this game for 45 years. I still have fond memories of our young hack-n-slash days. But, I think, as Magnus has so eloquently stated, that the game has evolved away from such simpler RPG times. For the better, I might add.

On the other hand, like other such things, the development has gone to the other end of the scale... Not that that is a bad thing, mind you. But there isn't a measuring stick anymore.

[masterdaorin]

I've been continuing to ponder your post and the style of game you prefer, and keep wondering: Is D&D really the best game system for what you are trying to achieve?

LOL, you speak the truth. I do find D&D to have some drawbacks (like every other game, note, so I don't need to be flamed about saying that).

However, I do love BR, and I do like the game, so I thought I would revisit it and see if I can't make a proper treatment of Birthright for my group. And so I have been chugging along, and I am almost done. The first campaign is done; I'm in the process of going back and filling in what I've learned over the course of play.

I just need to write out all the law, temple, and guild domains, make character stats for every regent listed in all five domain books, and then proofread it all, and I will have the whole continent contained in three supplements, ready for anyone to pick up and play.

That all being said, I find no reason why D&D can't be flexible and adapt to the style of individual gaming groups. If I accomplish anything here in this thread, it's that - D&D can be so much more than what is presented; be brave and try something different for a change.

BR is the PERFECT setting to do just that.

Of course, I'm biased, so don't just take my word about it. Try it yourself.

And I'm here, if you want ideas, help with a problem, or what have you. Just ask. I've spent a lot of time just such things, and how to make a better story.

[masterdaorin]

I've always liked that Birthright treats magic as not normal more than other settings. I agree that rarity or even lack of understanding does not equate to fear.

Of course, and I'll just add, as devil's advocate:

A gaming group must remember that our understanding goes far beyond what was known even just a century ago, and certainly several centuries ago.

It wouldn't hurt to keep in mind that magic (for example) was REAL to people back then. And so were monsters. And gods. Wrap your brain around that. And, we have our history to bear witness to various peoples' and cultures' responses to those beliefs.

All I'm saying, is that BR people and cultures really wouldn't react all that differently from our real world references.

Having, for example, 21st century's human reactions to those common problems might not be the only solution to a problem facing your game. Look back at history, and take your cues from that.

I'll give you an example:

IMC, four of the players (in this theatre of action, all playing brothers) killed their own mother - because she was sleeping with one NPC that they didn't like (and he wasn't even that bad a guy, either). Then they covered it up. And, then, they hunted that guy down and killed him as well. Needless to say, there were consequences (too long to list here). They all ended up dead, and got their just deserts... heh.

But the oldest brother's son survived... and inherited the realm...

Now that's good RPG-ing. And a darn-fine BR campaign.

[Fizz]

It wouldn't hurt to keep in mind that magic (for example) was REAL to people back then. And so were monsters. And gods. Wrap your brain around that. And, we have our history to bear witness to various peoples' and cultures' responses to those beliefs.

All I'm saying, is that BR people and cultures really wouldn't react all that differently from our real world references.

I take your point, but i don't think it's a perfect comparison. Fantastical events can have far more tangible effects in an RPG world than were ever experienced in the real world.

For example, in both Birthright and the real world, a king might believe he is cursed (or blessed), and that might determine whether he decides to go to war. But only in Birthright (or other rpg fantasy) would that king actually consider a wizard tossing fireballs or raising an undead army. No real world king ever went to war with those kinds of concerns, but they are legitimate considerations in Birthright.

Similarly, no real world king ever went to war worried about whether the other side had a unit of gryphons or giants. Whereas in an rpg world, a sizable portion of the populous may have actually seen such beasts (less so in Birthright of course).

So i think that would make a difference in how people react. Belief can be powerful for sure, but more powerful than undeniable effects that everyone can see and hear and feel? I'm not sure.


-Fizz

[Delazar]

It used to be that the game only existed in English, but recently a version of the game was created by Free League Publishing (Frialigan), and now includes an all-English version called Dragonbane. It's very reasonably priced as a starter box set or pdf, and I couldn't help but think it might make a truly awesome game system for adapting to Birthright.

I'm so tempted to write a small conversion document to play Birthright with the Dragonbane rules. Somehow Dragonbane really gives me a Birthright vibe! Maybe it's the art style of the starter set, very evocative!

[Delazar]

If you were to advance the timeline of the setting, how far would you jump ahead? I’ve been thinking of going through the campaign supplements and updating the state of things on each domain, or at least region, based on the adventure hooks that are provided in each realm entry. Obviously this would be my personal opinion on the likelihood of possible futures, but I’m curious how far others would advance it, given the chance.

So far I've advanced the timeline 120 years, I believe. Campaign Setting starts at 550 MR, and we're currently at 673 MR... and still going!

https://birthrightfp.blogspot.com/