Results 1 to 10 of 15
Threaded View
-
07-20-2006, 01:52 AM #1
- Join Date
- Jun 2006
- Posts
- 190
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
Court Actions for the non-courtly...
Source regents seem to get the short end of the stick as far as rules go. I have a few questions about how some of the regent mechanics apply:
- Can a source regent use Rule Holding to improve a source even if not physically present in the province? Other holdings can increase in this way, but since a source holding represents a magical connection to the province, I'm not sure that it can occur without the regent's presence.
- Source regents are, in general, not required to have a court (hence the topic header). This introduces a new set of questions:
- Are they required to have a court to oversee virtual guilds? For example, if a source regent has a level 7 source (hence a level 3 virtual guild) should he also have a level 3 court?
- If they don't have a court at all, must they use a Full Domain action to perform any domain actions they wish? In other words, they can't adventure if they (say) Rule Holding?
- If they have a level 1 or 2 court, they can perform domain actions without their personal attention. However, they still don't have any court actions. Can you use a character action to perform a court action? Can regents that have a court of 3 or better use their character action to get an additional court action?
- If two PC regents wish to create a trade route between their respective guilds, they are still presumably required to set this up with a Diplomacy action. Must a PC regent engaged in such an action with another PC regent still make the normal resolution check, or can a PC who is targetted by Diplomacy simply answer as he sees fit? Does it make any difference if the targetted PC regent personally attends? (This is not unrelated; source regents will generally have very low court ratings, and since the difference in court ratings is a modifier on the diplomacy check, they will rarely succeed against their PC allies with much better courts, even for agreements to their mutual benefit).
Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks