Page 6 of 16 FirstFirst ... 2345678910 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 153
  1. #51
    Special Guest (Donor)
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    southwest Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    563
    Downloads
    140
    Uploads
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by irdeggman
    We seem to be missing each other here.

    A character can be regent without being a noble.
    OK, yes. Understood that.

    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).
    This is where i was not sure of what you were saying. I thought you were saying Nobles were better than specifically the variant rogue guilder class, but that Nobles were not better than any other class.

    Thus, i thought you were being very harsh on the guilder class.

    But in actuality, you're blanketted all classes, saying the Noble is better for regency than ANY class. I understand your meaning now.

    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.
    By extension then, if there is a GuildMaster PrC, there should also be a `Warlord', `High Priest', and `Source Mage' prestige classes. A specialty prestige class for each holding. (Or possibly more if you sub-divide those up.)

    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.
    I never thought of guilders that way though- those extra proficiency slots could be really useful if you used them the right way. Guess it depends on how big a role proficiencies played in your particular campaign. (As a side note, imc rangers and bards do not cast spells at all. So the magician, with a couple tweaks, becomes quite a relevant class.)

    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.
    OK, i see your point in this. I guess we're going about trying to capture different sides of the class. I've been thinking along the lines of a skilled-adventuring-expert, while you've been focusing on the regency-domain-actions side.


    -Fizz

  2. #52
    Site Moderator kgauck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Springfield Mo
    Posts
    3,562
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    Middle class doesn not mean mid-level wealth. Indeed, anyone who can count quickly realizies that a guy who owns guild holdings and trade routes makes more money than a guy who owns provinces. This was also true of the rennaissance in Europe, where bankrupt nobles sought marriages with the rising and wealthier merchant families.

    Secondly, why is it not natural and normal for wealth to beget wealth? Why should it not be the case that the children of the guilders are indeed the guilders of the next generation?

    Sure just as an Anuirian of obscure origin might win fame on the battlefield, rise to a knighthood, and perhaps even a lordship, once in a great while (like when we talk about those exceptional people, PC's) some blooded young fellow might win a handsome stake at dice when Lady Luck smiled on him, and parlay it into a ship of his own, wherin he takes cargos to foriegn shores and earns remarkable profits. Over time such a figure might aquire a fleet of ships and even some holdings in two key ports.

    To say these things are possible is not to say that its far more common for the the son of a guilder (or even a landed gentleman) to seek his fortune in trade. He may succeed his father's holdings, or start a new trade domain. But the class that best describes him is one that would give him some learned background in how to run a trade domain.

    Finally the rogue is not just a theif, or even primarily a thief (if by thief what you mean is pickpocket, burglar, or bandit), certainly the merchant has always had the reputation of a theif if you mean someone who reprents inferior goods as high quality, who uses false weights to balance coins paid to him, who shaves coins in his posession, who lies, cheats, and otherwise steals. Consdier that seasonal favorite, Ebenezer Scrooge, who was quite honest, but still despised. I saw Harry Potter II on cable this weekend, and when the old merchant is pawning some of the senior Malfoy's goods, when the blonde fellow turns to reprimand his son, he steals back some of the coins he paid for Manfoy's goods. I don't think that the guilders are so terribly un-rogue like. Slight of Hand, Bluff, Appraise, Decipher Script, Diplomacy, Forgery, Gather Information, Sense Motive all are useful to the Guilder, and all are Rogue skills.

  3. #53
    Site Moderator kgauck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Springfield Mo
    Posts
    3,562
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Fizz
    By extension then, if there is a GuildMaster PrC, there should also be a `Warlord', `High Priest', and `Source Mage' prestige classes. A specialty prestige class for each holding. (Or possibly more if you sub-divide those up.)
    I think classes like warlord, high priest, and even source mage are more pretty common in the Complete source books. You can find classes that allow you to direct and maintain large barbarian hordes, give morale bonuses to your armies within sight and sound of your voice, cultivate a loyal following, collect additional followers of your class type, and do other things that already suit the domian leader of the various domain types. Certainly they could be enhanced to give them a more BR flavor, but the basics are there. For Guilder, I have seen the Kingpin in City Works which is very much a theives guild type of guilder, but quite good. I expect Cityscape will have a class or two that helps, but for the most part, a good Guilder class has been missing, where warlord, high priest, and ley line using arcanists are out there.

  4. #54
    Birthright Developer irdeggman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Virginia Beach, Virginia
    Posts
    3,945
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by kgauck
    I think classes like warlord, high priest, and even source mage are more pretty common in the Complete source books. You can find classes that allow you to direct and maintain large barbarian hordes, give morale bonuses to your armies within sight and sound of your voice, cultivate a loyal following, collect additional followers of your class type, and do other things that already suit the domian leader of the various domain types. Certainly they could be enhanced to give them a more BR flavor, but the basics are there. For Guilder, I have seen the Kingpin in City Works which is very much a theives guild type of guilder, but quite good. I expect Cityscape will have a class or two that helps, but for the most part, a good Guilder class has been missing, where warlord, high priest, and ley line using arcanists are out there.

    I agree with this.

    Cityscape is a good book. It doesn't, however capture city-based classes or prestige classes. It does give a lot of information on how to structure cities. Districts, politics, houses, guilds, organizations and the like. It also introduces the concept of contacts in a bit of detail (and some feats to modify it).

    It also defines "social classes".

    Lower class: the relatively poor.

    Middle class: representing those who are doing reasonably well for themselves, but still hold little true wealth or power.

    Upper class: royalty, nobility, and those so powerfully wealthy that they are capable of influencing the course of society.

    But there hasn't been anything that really focuses on a class that is akin to the guilder. IMO it is because the guilder was designed to be bigger than someone who runs a shop (again the domain level of play) and D&D just doesn't recognize that level at all.
    Duane Eggert

  5. #55
    Special Guest (Donor)
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    southwest Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    563
    Downloads
    140
    Uploads
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by kgauck
    Secondly, why is it not natural and normal for wealth to beget wealth? Why should it not be the case that the children of the guilders are indeed the guilders of the next generation?
    I'm not saying it can't be. But the description of the guilder in Havens was quite clear that guilders can be of any social or wealth class. Indeed, it says MOST guilders are of the middle class. These are people who do work for a living (sailor, merchant, etc).

    "... they generally fall into the middle layers of income (in that incredibly wide gap between royalty and peasant landowners)."

    Sure just as an Anuirian of obscure origin might win fame on the battlefield, rise to a knighthood, and perhaps even a lordship, once in a great while (like when we talk about those exceptional people, PC's) some blooded young fellow might win a handsome stake at dice when Lady Luck smiled on him, and parlay it into a ship of his own, wherin he takes cargos to foriegn shores and earns remarkable profits. Over time such a figure might aquire a fleet of ships and even some holdings in two key ports.
    Which is kind of the point of a PC isn't it? Don't most PC's want to earn fame/fortune/power? I don't know many PC's who stay home not wanting to do any great deeds. Most NPC guilders, just like most NPC fighters, won't achieve this level of greatness. But it's got to be very possible for a PC character.

    I don't think that the guilders are so terribly un-rogue like. Slight of Hand, Bluff, Appraise, Decipher Script, Diplomacy, Forgery, Gather Information, Sense Motive all are useful to the Guilder, and all are Rogue skills.
    In 2nd Ed, the guilder was a member of the Rogue group, just like the thief. but Havens is very deliberate in saying that guilders do not get any thief abilities, other than Read Languages. So all of the stealthy aspects of the 3E Rogue, such as Hiding, Moving Silently, Sneak Attacking, Dodging, are all entirely inappropriate to the guilder (assuming you want to keep the same flavor of the 2nd Ed guilder).

    And for the record, a 2nd Ed thief class didn't have to be a `thief' either.


    -Fizz
    Last edited by Fizz; 12-06-2006 at 12:01 AM.

  6. #56
    Special Guest (Donor)
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    southwest Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    563
    Downloads
    140
    Uploads
    1
    kgauck-
    I notice your site also has a core Guilder class. Do you use this class in your campaign?

    http://home.mchsi.com/~kgauck/taelshore/guilder.htm


    -Fizz
    Last edited by Fizz; 12-06-2006 at 12:06 AM.

  7. #57
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Blackgate, Danigau
    Posts
    87
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by kgauck
    I think classes like warlord, high priest, and even source mage are more pretty common in the Complete source books. You can find classes that allow you to direct and maintain large barbarian hordes, give morale bonuses to your armies within sight and sound of your voice, cultivate a loyal following, collect additional followers of your class type, and do other things that already suit the domian leader of the various domain types. Certainly they could be enhanced to give them a more BR flavor, but the basics are there.
    I agree there are already great ways to model a warlord, high priest, or uber mage in the various WotC sources. But I note, none of these are focused on domain level play at expense of being able to function in an typical D&D adventure style. I guess what I am looking to help others build is a guilder class which would fit in nicely with these other WotC 3e classes and PrCs.

    Certainly, any DM can create a class which ignores monster fighting or hands out domain level bonuses. Decreasing personal power in exchange for domain power could be a fun and interesting option. But is a domain focused path open to all of your players? If only players who are running guild holdings have a class with that choice, your other players might feel a lack of temple or law specialists. You might consider a suite of classes designed for all BR regents to specialize. [Perhaps beyond the scope of this discussion...]

    As we are just having a friendly brainstorm here, and not looking to make something "official" for the BRCS, I think we can discuss two different types of guilder classes. One, a standard WotC-style adventuring class who would fit nicely into any Complete Hero book, be mechanically on par with a rogue running a Guild, but have better flavor. Another, that tries to capture a guild domain focused regent, who trades combat and dungeon prowess for more domain power than a rogue or cleric. Perhaps, for labeling purposes call the first the [Complete] Guilder class and the latter a [Regent] Guilder class.

    As may be obvious, I would prefer the Complete Guilder to be available for all the campaigns I've ever played. The BR campaigns I have played in have tended to be at either extreme of playing styles. In the campaign where I am a rogue/ranger 'guilder', I dont think I've ever made a domain action check! And in the several Pbems Ive played, I think a guilder with domain bonuses would just replace the rogue, as those games tend to ignore adventuring/monster fighting and most players min/max for domain rule.

    Either way, I think we can all agree that 2e wasnt the paragon of balanced classes [see BR magician]. Whether we are helping BR fans who come to the site by kludging together a Complete Guilder or a Regent Guilder, the 2e Guilder need not be our arbiter of balance, just flavor.

  8. #58
    Birthright Developer irdeggman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Virginia Beach, Virginia
    Posts
    3,945
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Fizz
    In 2nd Ed, the guilder was a member of the Rogue group, just like the thief. but Havens is very deliberate in saying that guilders do not get any thief abilities, other than Read Languages. So all of the stealthy aspects of the 3E Rogue, such as Hiding, Moving Silently, Sneak Attacking, Dodging, are all entirely inappropriate to the guilder (assuming you want to keep the same flavor of the 2nd Ed guilder).

    And for the record, a 2nd Ed thief class didn't have to be a `thief' either.


    -Fizz
    yeah but the percentages that they had to apply (with a limit to how much each could be applied per level) forced them to be thief like.

    And in 3.5 they can apply their skill points to cross class skills instead (since they have so many now) as well as to class skills that definitely fit the guilder theme (like Appraise*, Balance (for those sea faring ones), Bluff*, Craft* , Deceipher Script, Diplomacy*, Disguise, Forgery, Gather Information*, Intimidate*, Knowledge (local), Listen (for eavesdropping), Profession*, Sense Motive*), * are key RP collection skills for guilds.

    Just because a skill is on their list doesn't mean it gets taken, most rogues don't take ranks in all of their current class skills anyway - they focus on a few that they are realy good at.

    Now the biggest one missing would be Speak Language and that belongs with the guilder theme, but again with the large amoutn of sp that a rogue gets and assuming the PC is beign kept true to the "theme" there are plenty left for cross-class skills in Speak Language.
    Duane Eggert

  9. #59
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    124
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    The only thing I`ve seen that comes close to showing
    how to put together entire trade networks in D&D is
    taken from two seperate books:

    Dungeon Master`s Guide II

    and

    Power of Faerun (where there is a Merchant Prince
    Prestige Class)

    Anthony Edwards


    --- irdeggman <brnetboard@BIRTHRIGHT.NET> wrote:
    > But there hasn`t been anything that really focuses
    > on a class that is akin to the guilder. IMO it is
    > because the guilder was designed to be bigger than
    > someone who runs a shop (again the domain level of
    > play) and D&D just doesn`t recognize that level at
    > all.




    __________________________________________________ __________________________________
    Do you Yahoo!?
    Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.
    http://new.mail.yahoo.com

  10. #60
    Special Guest (Donor)
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    southwest Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    563
    Downloads
    140
    Uploads
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by irdeggman
    yeah but the percentages that they had to apply (with a limit to how much each could be applied per level) forced them to be thief like.
    Oh, don't get me wrong, the 3E rogue has much more flexibility than the 2nd Ed Thief. But they're still stuck with Sneak Attack, Uncanny Dodge, Evasion, etc. All of those build up the uber-nimble character archetype, and are all decidedly un-guilderish.

    Now the biggest one missing would be Speak Language and that belongs with the guilder theme, but again with the large amoutn of sp that a rogue gets and assuming the PC is beign kept true to the "theme" there are plenty left for cross-class skills in Speak Language.
    Right, but if you leave it as cross-class, then one who wants to be a language specialist effectively loses half their skill points.

    This is why i think the variant is the way to go. Take the rogue. Drop the sneak attack, dodge, evasion, and all the sneaky skills. Replace with some other appropriate skills, and some of the special abilities that have been suggested here, maybe a bonus Skill Focus feat here and there. It'd be a perfectly playable class, and be very distinct from the rogue.

    (I'd also give the Guilder 10 skill points, but i've heard people say that goes against 3E- never understood why. But that's another debate...)


    -Fizz

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
BIRTHRIGHT, DUNGEONS & DRAGONS, D&D, the BIRTHRIGHT logo, and the D&D logo are trademarks owned by Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and are used by permission. ©2002-2010 Wizards of the Coast, Inc.