Results 41 to 50 of 153
Thread: Return of the Guilder
-
12-05-2006, 04:21 PM #41
- Join Date
- Nov 2001
- Location
- Virginia Beach, Virginia
- Posts
- 3,945
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
Kenneth - I like that one.
The "masses" clearly decided that the core BRCS guilder should be more of a knightly one and I had to fight to ensure that it could still function as a guilder of sorts, although it still ended up with the military leadership slant.Duane Eggert
-
12-05-2006, 06:06 PM #42
I have noticed a desire among some posters that classes be suitable for conventional adventuring. Its fun to go adventuring and seek the famed Sails of Captain Luetenhaven with their amazing ability to aid the speed, navigation, and sea-worthiness of a ship. But, some guilders never adventure. They may be your arch-rival who focuses entirely on his realm, rather than his own personal prowess, or he may be your stay-at-home lieutenant who watches the shop while you're out seeking the Rudder of the Shoals or doing climactic battle with the Vampire.
With the ease of multi-classing, each character can easily find the happy blend of adventuring classes and domain focused classes that best suits their own character concept. There is no shortage of Brecht (or otherwise) combat classes.
Heinrick von Lausruef might opt to go with Noble 3/Swashbucker5/Guilder 4 while his archrival Johann van der Leipzur might be Noble 5/Guilder 7. Heinrick would be the more adventuring character, and some players would prefer it. PBeM'ers or PC rivals, a PC's day-to-day operations guy, or even the PC himself might want to focus totally on his realm, his domain actions, and his organization, and want the skills and abilities to do that rather than make every class more or less balanced for combat.
-
12-05-2006, 06:31 PM #43
- Join Date
- Nov 2001
- Location
- southwest Ontario, Canada
- Posts
- 563
- Downloads
- 140
- Uploads
- 1
Havens of the Great Bay says:
"In Cerilia, the guilder also represents a new social class: the middle class. Guilders can be nobles or commoners, but they generally fall into the middle layers of income."
Further...
"Many Brechts become guilders in careers as sailors, merchants, farmers, and more."
This is completely at odds with the notion that guilders are born into money, or are only of the elitist class. Indeed, it's the exact opposite. Even the lowliest beggar could be crafty and work his way to great wealth.
-FizzLast edited by Fizz; 12-05-2006 at 06:36 PM.
-
12-05-2006, 06:53 PM #44
- Join Date
- Nov 2001
- Location
- Virginia Beach, Virginia
- Posts
- 3,945
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
In 2nd ed there was also no rogue class they were "thieves".
There was also nothing like Prestige Classes - kits (the closest thing) had to be taken at first level.
I said that the noble (those born to privelige) should have a quicker route to become the master trader. Those that struggled to become that would best fall under the realm of a prestige class.
So there are 2 paths to get there:
One via noble (those with a head above the others)
and the other a Prestige Class that characters have to earn their way to.
To best capture what you seem to be looking for a Prestige Class is probably best. The noble would most likely have the quickest path to it.
Even the lowliest beggar could be crafty and work his way to great wealth.
"Many Brechts become guilders in careers as sailors, merchants, farmers, and more."
To continue this paragraph:
"Unblooded guilders tend to progress within established guilds and become lieutenants, sea captains, and trade emissaries. Blooded guilders may work to become regents of their own guilds and strive to establish thier personal and regency power in the thriving merchantile lands around the Great Bay."
This still falls in line with my point about the domain level focus of teh class.Duane Eggert
-
12-05-2006, 07:03 PM #45
- Join Date
- Nov 2001
- Location
- Virginia Beach, Virginia
- Posts
- 3,945
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
It should also be noted that in 2nd ed a non-regent guilder could at best generate 6d4 x 10 gp per ply trade action. That is once a month thye coould generate that amount of income. Assuming it was an excellent trade (e.g. major merchant).
Only regents could perform domain actions (ply trade was a character action). They would have to gain any other income from advneturing (which really doesn't reflect the core concept of being a guilder at all IMO).Duane Eggert
-
12-05-2006, 07:22 PM #46
- Join Date
- Nov 2001
- Location
- southwest Ontario, Canada
- Posts
- 563
- Downloads
- 140
- Uploads
- 1
Originally Posted by irdeggman
I said that the noble (those born to privelige) should have a quicker route to become the master trader. Those that struggled to become that would best fall under the realm of a prestige class.
"Unblooded guilders tend to progress within established guilds and become lieutenants, sea captains, and trade emissaries. Blooded guilders may work to become regents of their own guilds and strive to establish thier personal and regency power in the thriving merchantile lands around the Great Bay."
For example, fighters can be rich or poor, and they can become lieutenants or work to become regents (if blooded) too. Yet, you don't need a prestige class for the pauper fighter to become a regent.
So why should it be different for the guilder? Why can't a single core class guilder (rogue variant) be able to advance his way to guild-leader?
-FizzLast edited by Fizz; 12-05-2006 at 07:32 PM.
-
12-05-2006, 07:40 PM #47
- Join Date
- Nov 2001
- Location
- Virginia Beach, Virginia
- Posts
- 3,945
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
Originally Posted by Fizz
But you did say that Guilders are best made through the Noble class. But the Noble class is the class of privelige. My point was that guilders should not have that requirement.
Yes, and this doesn't change anything. What's said there is the same as for any class in Birthright.
For example, fighters can be rich or poor, and they can become lieutenants or work to become regents (if blooded) too. Yet, you don't need a prestige class for the pauper fighter to become a regent.
In 2nd ed the guilder had that specific text that was very much tied into domain levela ctions. They are also the only class to be given bonuses for domain level action in 2nd ed and specifically called out to be given role-playing awards for executing said domain level actions. So the very class was oriented around the domain level of play, unlike the other classes.
So why should it be different for the guilder? Why can't a single core class guilder (rogue variant) be able to advance his way to guild-leader?
Everything you have pointed out here and say you want ends up defining a Prestige Class.
A noble would have the quickest path to this one.
A commoner would go through the Expert NPC class.
Or you could do a rogue (variant).
All paths would end up in the same place - the Guild Master.
I still think the end in mind is a class that is the master of major economics. A guild Master, a merchant Prince, a fleet admiral, something that is greater the the normal merchant.Duane Eggert
-
12-05-2006, 08:58 PM #48
- Join Date
- Nov 2001
- Location
- southwest Ontario, Canada
- Posts
- 563
- Downloads
- 140
- Uploads
- 1
"Best" is not a requirement. Best means the easiest and quickest way to get there.
If so, then that's fine. I was getting the impression that you thought it was the best way ONLY for guilders. That the Noble class would not be the best way for a fighter, priest, etc.
In 2nd ed the guilder had that specific text that was very much tied into domain levela ctions. They are also the only class to be given bonuses for domain level action in 2nd ed and specifically called out to be given role-playing awards for executing said domain level actions. So the very class was oriented around the domain level of play, unlike the other classes.
Also, the mechanics for 3E are different too. In the BRCS domain action checks are based on skills, not class. The guilder should have the appropriate skills as class skills, and not worry about the class bonus 2nd Ed gave them.
Everything you have pointed out here and say you want ends up defining a Prestige Class.
-FizzLast edited by Fizz; 12-05-2006 at 09:27 PM.
-
12-05-2006, 09:29 PM #49
- Join Date
- Nov 2001
- Location
- Virginia Beach, Virginia
- Posts
- 3,945
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
Originally Posted by FizzHmmm. That's not what i'm envisioning. At least, not any more than any other class. That is to say- i don't think the guilder should have any more difficulty working his way to regent than any other class. I don't think the guilder needs any rules or conditions that wouldn't also apply to other classes. Does that make sense?
-Fizz
A character can be regent without being a noble.
A noble will make the best regent, as far as Realm Management goes.
A noble also has the skill selection (and skill points) to give him a leg up on being a regent of any type (except the spell caster ones, but even there he can get the necessary skills to higher ranks quicker than most).
A Guild Master, IMO, is not just a regent he is a regent who is especially good at the domain level economics. That was what I was trying to get to.
2nd ed said they were to be used as adventurers, but most have seen that they were much more focused at the domain level. Magicians in 2nd ed were supposed to be a decent adventuring class too - both failed in comparison to every other class.
Magicians were just too weak and guilders were too focused on domain actions. For adventuring it was far better to play a thief or a bard than a guilder. A guilder didn't really have anything that he could do adventure-wise. He had better armor and weapons than a thief, but didn't have any of the combat or stealth abilities. He had better interaction capabilites than a thief, but nowhere as good as a bard and no spell capability.
So capturing that in 3.5 seems kind of counterproductive to me. Whereas capturing the domain level command of economics seems to be something interesting and very reflective of the Brecht culture.Duane Eggert
-
12-05-2006, 09:45 PM #50
- Join Date
- Jan 2006
- Posts
- 124
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
I removed the entire problem by realizing that ANYONE
can be a guilder. I`ve had Fighters become
guild-masters and rule guild holdings. I simply
removed the "class requirement" from the different
types of holdings...even source holdings simply
because:
Anyone with the "Blood of the Gods" could make a
connection with the "Land" or whatever other force
allows the collection of regency.
The reason I did this is that I had players constantly
debating "Why can`t my Fighter collect regency from a
guild holding when he puts the time and effort into
running the business?"
I tried explaining it took certain skills to do it
"the right way" but he explained (and justly so) that
his fighter had a high INT and high CHA as well; so he
didn`t think his fighter was not capable of running a
business.
So I said: "Ok...no class requirements for collecting
regency...but if someone out "skills" you, I don`t
want to hear complaining!"
Worked out pretty good.
Anthony Edwards
__________________________________________________ __________________________________
Want to start your own business?
Learn how on Yahoo! Small Business.
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/r-index
Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks