Results 11 to 20 of 27
Thread: Orcs in Birthright?
-
12-12-2006, 02:27 PM #11
I use goblins an awful lot. Men too. I don't think a laboring subrace of Orogs creates any setting problems.
As for saving monsters for higher levels, I rather think its the reverse. I avoid high CR monsters. I don't see Cerilia supporting high CR monsters except in wild places, and the special exceptions of abominations (which are just transformed humans, mostly). The world is full of people and their parasites.
-
12-12-2006, 02:55 PM #12
- Join Date
- Nov 2002
- Location
- England
- Posts
- 95
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
i still think man is the best monster out there.
-
12-12-2006, 06:59 PM #13Originally Posted by irdeggman
There may be others like that.
I hold to the play what you want rule. My players know that I will take full advantage of their deficiencies.When you play the game of thrones you win or you die.
George R. R. Martin - A song of Ice and Fire
-
12-12-2006, 07:49 PM #14
- Join Date
- Nov 2001
- Location
- Virginia Beach, Virginia
- Posts
- 3,945
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
Originally Posted by ploesch
Evidently Rich Baker had something to say about in the mailserv (which I can't find).
http://www.birthright.net/showthread.php?t=1281&highlight=rich+baker+gnomes
http://www.birthright.net/showthread.php?t=1307&highlight=rich+baker+gnomes
http://www.birthright.net/showthread.php?t=2085&highlight=rich+baker+gnomes
Duane Eggert
-
12-12-2006, 09:09 PM #15
- Join Date
- Nov 2001
- Location
- southwest Ontario, Canada
- Posts
- 563
- Downloads
- 140
- Uploads
- 1
Originally Posted by Mantyluoto
It means the antagonists can be non-traditional, such as elves defending their woods, or dwarves of Mur-Kilad, or an Anuirean expanding his realm.
But from another perspective, your antagonists could be the protagonists. Makes for great story telling and more complex scenarios than just `good vs evil'.
-Fizz
-
12-12-2006, 11:00 PM #16
> This actually brings up one of the best things about Birthright (imo anyways). Namely, that
> races don't define the `good guys' and `bad guys'. Every race has it's own set of motives
> that may come into conflict with others.
Yeah, that can get PCs into trouble. My party found the Sword of Roele but the other party members couldn't understand why my Rjiruk Druid wanted the symbol of the oppressive Empire destroyed...... and still doesn't really want any new empire run by anyone... Anuirean or Awnie! Thank Erik for a kind DM (smiles at Doyle), high charisma, Diplomacy as a NWP, "disguised" casting and swift talking!
And the party-vs-NPC party scenario that Doyle just described was based around the party's Khinasi half-elf over-reacting to something the rest of the party couldn't really give a stuff about given our priorities at the time. His cultural expectations were getting us into trouble. An enemy for one is not necessarily an enemy for all.
SorontarSorontar
Information Communication ILLUMINATION!!
-
12-12-2006, 11:10 PM #17Originally Posted by Fizz
So I've developed a little rule for myself that I try and include one combat per session.
All the natural antognists in my campaigns are real people with normal aspirations. But it creates a situation where players feel constrained, just as they are in their normal lives, to behave themselves. It makes for great role play and innovative problem solving, but cathartic its not.
A little mayhem mixes things up a bit.
-
12-13-2006, 02:08 PM #18
- Join Date
- Jan 2006
- Posts
- 124
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
I ran into a similar problem years ago when I first
started playing BR...my players wanted to be in the
thick of combat sometimes. I instituted a simple
"ancient Andu law" concerning champion combat and
dueling. If someone thought their honor was being
abused by someone less honest and trustworthy, they
could challenge them to a duel/trial by combat...
some of my players tried to abuse the system at first
by challenging neighboring monarchs; but I then
detailed the law and said that only when a person`s
own honor is at stake, not the position they hold,
they could issue challenges. So, even if a diplomat
from Ghoere insulted the Baron of Roesone AS the Baron
of Roesone (by suggesting his nation was weak or his
military filled with idiots) this would be a matter to
resolve between nations and not individuals. On the
other hand, if the diplomat said the BARON was an
idiot, then of course it was on!
More on topic about orcs: I haven`t missed them even a
small bit in Birthright...I loved Orogs even before BR
came out...remembering the first time I saw their
picture in the 2nd Ed. Monster Binder (can`t remember
the name of the insertable monster pages...) I decided
I would LOVE to play an orog or at the least use them
as a major bad-guy race in my games.
For me, orcs in BR are not needed simply because there
are soooo many other races that fill the niche more
than enough: orogs, goblins x3, gnolls, Vos...
Yeah, Vos...nothing like a good ol` barbarian Horde
sweeping out of Vosgaard to ruin your day. Doesn`t
even have to be all that massive really to threaten
some of the independent nations of Cerilia. Ten units
of Vos troops can put a damper on anybody! And how
many nations...honestly...can simply ignore 2,000
bloodthirsty Vos warriors? And if you want to make it
REALLY bad, throw in some goblin slave-soldiers (say
four or five units of goblin fodder) and you have a
nice horde.
Anthony Edwards
--- kgauck <brnetboard@BIRTHRIGHT.NET> wrote:
> ------------ QUOTE ----------
> But from another perspective, your antagonists could
> be the protagonists. Makes for great story telling
> and more complex scenarios than just `good vs evil`.
>
> -----------------------------
>
>
>
> This is the essense of my campaigns, but when you
> run this way, it creates problems. Players can
> become gun shy, and then after a session someone
> says to you, the games are fun, but once in while
> I`d like to kill something.
>
> So I`ve developed a little rule for myself that I
> try and include one combat per session.
>
> All the natural antognists in my campaigns are real
> people with normal aspirations. But it creates a
> situation where players feel constrained, just as
> they are in their normal lives, to behave
> themselves. It makes for great role play and
> innovative problem solving, but cathartic its not.
>
> A little mayhem mixes things up a bit.
__________________________________________________ __________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.
http://new.mail.yahoo.com
-
12-13-2006, 04:06 PM #19
- Join Date
- Nov 2001
- Location
- Columbus, Ohio, United States
- Posts
- 440
- Downloads
- 20
- Uploads
- 0
In a message dated 12/12/06 2:47:34 PM Eastern Standard Time,
brnetboard@BIRTHRIGHT.NET writes:
<< I hold to the play what you want rule. My players know that I will take
full advantage of their deficiencies. >>
I prefer to be able to limit their ranges. That said, I`m also open to
exploring the new stuff that`s coming out in piles. Thus, I allowed an elven
wamage last year-- it was the first time we`d seen that. (It won`t be
repeated, I think.)
Lee.
-
12-13-2006, 04:30 PM #20
- Join Date
- Nov 2001
- Location
- Virginia Beach, Virginia
- Posts
- 3,945
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
Originally Posted by Lee
The class is designed to be trained in a war college and that concept doesn't mesh well with the elves disfavoring evocation/invocation spells.
Warmages spells are almost exclusively evocations.
The class does, however, fit extremely well with Anuirean society.Duane Eggert
Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks