Page 10 of 11 FirstFirst ... 67891011 LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 106
  1. #91
    Birthright Developer irdeggman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Virginia Beach, Virginia
    Posts
    3,945
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Rowan View Post
    Wizards face contestation and outright aggression from other wizards, forging and breaking ley lines, creating, ruling, and contesting sources. This should be happening at least to the same extent in a properly-balanced game among source regents as it should among guild regents or temple regents or law regents.
    Aren't there supposed to be less wizards around than other the other classes by definition.

    So that means less, but more focused competition.

    How often do temples and guilds receive Contest actions from holdings of a different type? Hardly ever, I would think, unless they've obtained a dangerous monopoly (in which case they don't have a guild opposing them and draining their RP, anyway).
    In games I've played in, quite frequently.

    Landed regents especially go after guilds, in fact just about every regent does.


    So no, wizard regents do not often have larger amounts of RP available. Even if they did (and if you look at the size of non-elven Source domains, you see that they are pretty small), the Realm Spells that are supposed to be their bread and butter cost an enormous amount of RP to cast, thus more than making up for the difference.

    There IS NO RP imbalance issue for Source holders, unless it is a net DISadvantage due to the cost of realm spells and the small size of most source domains.

    Does this address your last concern, then? To recognize that Source holders almost never have more (usually less) RP than non-Source holders, and thus they cannot possibly compete against the other holding types directly, because they are also far less specialized.

    So now we are accounting for previous realm actions?

    I said that a wizard does not use his RP to defend his holdings as much as other regents - therefor he can focus that RP on other actions.

    Other regents have to use their RP to defend as well as to attempt other domain actions (so comparing realm spells to contesting a guild holding is really not even close - I've had games where the RP bidding was well over 10 per side). Think what happens for a guild based in the Imperial City - how hotly is that going to be contested? Really, really fiercely I dare say.

    If that's not enough, consider the skill sets required. Wizard regents have cross-class skills in everything that helps you run all the other holding types, so their personal skill bonuses and feat selections will put them at a further disadvantage.
    This is fairly easily addressed by scion classes or a single dip into another class. Yes I know it greatly reduces a wizard's spellcasting effectiveness - but we are talking exclusively about realm level play and not adventure level.

    In that arena a character with more diversity is much better. A level in noble can have a huge impact on most any "primary" class.


    Now what specifically are you referring to to when you say skills necessary to run domains?

    Are you talking about collecting RP or about the skill checks necessary to complete an action?

    Wizards get craft and profession as class skills (which work for RP collection of guilds).

    Now most domain actions are currently tied to either administrate or lead.

    Also note this has no effect unless it is a full domain action (i.e., the regent does the action personally).

    We have already established that a source regent usually does not have a court that can do actions for him and so must personally perform almost all actions (something listed as weakness in the system earlier - but requiring a separate fix). So that means a wizard can apply bonuses based on his skill ranks more often than other regents can, since they will be performing less full domain actions due to necessity.
    Duane Eggert

  2. #92
    Site Moderator AndrewTall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    2,476
    Downloads
    30
    Uploads
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by irdeggman View Post
    Aren't there supposed to be less wizards around than other the other classes by definition.

    So that means less, but more focused competition.
    From recollection most realms are of similar sizes - there is an obvious gameplay reason for this but I'd have expected lots more 'small' guilds and temples otherwise... In any event the outcome is that all holdings face a relatively small number of competitors.

    Quote Originally Posted by irdeggman View Post
    In games I've played in, quite frequently.

    Landed regents especially go after guilds, in fact just about every regent does.
    Which suggests to me that there is a problem with the guild rules - guilds should not be an 'easy money' win that everyone automatically piles into. I've done it myself when playing a ruler as the benefits of trade routes are so great (esp in 2e) so know the problem well. I'm not entirely sure how to fix it - maybe with separate domain-level classes as noted - but something needs sorting out in my view, this is not however a 'source' point - it applies equally, if not far more so, to realm rulers and temple rulers.

    Quote Originally Posted by irdeggman View Post
    I said that a wizard does not use his RP to defend his holdings as much as other regents - therefore he can focus that RP on other actions.
    The main limit on source contests is the cost of the action imho - if the lack of income is corrected I'd expect high competition for sources in the more settled areas of Cerilia just as there should already be for other types of holding. I'd also repeat that breaking into another holding type is very hard for a mage under the standard rules as they have to burn a lot of RP to get the GB needed for actions.

    Quote Originally Posted by irdeggman View Post
    Other regents have to use their RP to defend as well as to attempt other domain actions (so comparing realm spells to contesting a guild holding is really not even close - I've had games where the RP bidding was well over 10 per side). Think what happens for a guild based in the Imperial City - how hotly is that going to be contested? Really, really fiercely I dare say.
    I'd note that in practice guilds in particular should run on a cost:benefit basis - 10 RP bidding wars are a sucking quagmire of influence that should be avoided like the plague by any economic rationalist (unless they simply have nothing better to spend RP on). Particularly in BRCS where province level is irrelevant to guild income it is more cost effective to rule up guilds in smaller less contested areas than in 'hot spots'. Again however the guild point seems to be an issue for guilds not sources - I'm not sure how much RP rulers spend defending investiture attempts but expect that they also have relatively little 'RP competition', those who start contested law probably find soldiers marching in their direction too...

    Quote Originally Posted by irdeggman View Post
    This is fairly easily addressed by scion classes or a single dip into another class. Yes I know it greatly reduces a wizard's spellcasting effectiveness - but we are talking exclusively about realm level play and not adventure level.

    In that arena a character with more diversity is much better. A level in noble can have a huge impact on most any "primary" class...So that means a wizard can apply bonuses based on his skill ranks more often than other regents can, since they will be performing less full domain actions due to necessity.
    Unlike any other class wizards need those spell-casting levels for their main domain ability - realm spells. Similarly they need to go up in adventuring levels to be able to cast the 'crunchy' spells that win them influence meaning that they need adventure-type feats and skills. 2 skill points a level + intelligence is poor compared to a 'pure' noble or rogue that isn't a complete idiot. Accordingly the wizard will generally have poor RP collection and poor skill selections at domain level outside of their specialty holding - probably sources. I can see guilders being worried about nobles in particular - but not wizards.

    I'm not sure I get your point on the skill bonus for actions - all regents get 3 actions where they can add their personal skill modifiers, landed regents just also get a stack of court actions on top - they don't lose their normal actions unless I have mis-read the BRCS.

  3. #93
    Birthright Developer irdeggman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Virginia Beach, Virginia
    Posts
    3,945
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by AndrewTall View Post
    From recollection most realms are of similar sizes - there is an obvious gameplay reason for this but I'd have expected lots more 'small' guilds and temples otherwise... In any event the outcome is that all holdings face a relatively small number of competitors.
    Realom size wasn;'t the issue.

    The issue was the number of like realms compteting agains each other.

    There are by definition in BR fewer wizards - so fewer people competing for sources.

    There are a relative plethora of different guilders. Guild only regents, landed regents with guilds, etc.

    All competing for guild levels



    Which suggests to me that there is a problem with the guild rules - guilds should not be an 'easy money' win that everyone automatically piles into. I've done it myself when playing a ruler as the benefits of trade routes are so great (esp in 2e) so know the problem well. I'm not entirely sure how to fix it - maybe with separate domain-level classes as noted - but something needs sorting out in my view, this is not however a 'source' point - it applies equally, if not far more so, to realm rulers and temple rulers.
    Which is why I said we need to looka t each type of regent and figure out what they do best and what they do worst and "fix" the comain level rules to match.

    Merely working on soruce regents will only make it more skewed and "patchy" instead of looking at the big picture.



    The main limit on source contests is the cost of the action imho - if the lack of income is corrected I'd expect high competition for sources in the more settled areas of Cerilia just as there should already be for other types of holding. I'd also repeat that breaking into another holding type is very hard for a mage under the standard rules as they have to burn a lot of RP to get the GB needed for actions.
    But the only ones competing for sources are wizards (that is those who can use them). Only blooded wizards can find (and use) sources. It is one of their main benefits.



    I'd note that in practice guilds in particular should run on a cost:benefit basis - 10 RP bidding wars are a sucking quagmire of influence that should be avoided like the plague by any economic rationalist (unless they simply have nothing better to spend RP on). Particularly in BRCS where province level is irrelevant to guild income it is more cost effective to rule up guilds in smaller less contested areas than in 'hot spots'. Again however the guild point seems to be an issue for guilds not sources - I'm not sure how much RP rulers spend defending investiture attempts but expect that they also have relatively little 'RP competition', those who start contested law probably find soldiers marching in their direction too...
    Back to looking at the system as a whole and not working on a single piece without looking at how all the pieces interact.



    I'm not sure I get your point on the skill bonus for actions - all regents get 3 actions where they can add their personal skill modifiers, landed regents just also get a stack of court actions on top - they don't lose their normal actions unless I have mis-read the BRCS.
    Not quite.

    Every domain turn a regent gets 3 character actions and 3 domain actions.

    If he uses both his character action and his domain action at the same time (that is a full domain action) - that is the only time he gets to use his personal skills and feats to modify the domain action success.

    Court actions don't allow this addition.

    Wizards (under the current rules) are pretty much locked into direct involvment in any domain action involving a source (thus a full domain action). Increasing income will not "fix" this issue.
    Duane Eggert

  4. #94
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    439
    Downloads
    31
    Uploads
    0
    I have no problem looking at rebalancing other regents as well where they have deficiencies.

    Is that what you're mainly trying to point out Irdeggman?


    One of the lessons of 3e and 4e, I think, is that all game systems can be improved for better game play and better story simulation, and that we should not be reluctant to do so with core rules sets periodically. Let us not be hesitant to change things because we hold one version or other of the rules as a sacred cow, but, for the good of the game, engage in the discussion of what improvements can be made. Forums and Wiki are great media to work on these things, but if we get serious about it we should record proposed rules changes in a section of the wiki and then roll out versions or alternative rules when we're ready.

  5. #95
    Birthright Developer irdeggman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Virginia Beach, Virginia
    Posts
    3,945
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Rowan View Post
    Is that what you're mainly trying to point out Irdeggman?
    Pretty much.

    The fact that how a source regent works is part of a system and that the system should be addressed and not just a part.

    I think we start with a scale of figuring out what each regent type does best and what they do worst and find ways to emphasize that pattern. Sort of like what 4th ed is going to do - no "favored class" penalties but bonuses if you go towards a class that the race works best at.

    The end in mind being that all regent types should be able to do something each round (again like 4th ed and not forcing wizards to use xbows when they run out of daily spells).

    This type of "fix" could work regardless of the edition of the rules being used, IMO.
    Last edited by irdeggman; 03-20-2008 at 03:28 PM.
    Duane Eggert

  6. #96
    Site Moderator AndrewTall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    2,476
    Downloads
    30
    Uploads
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by irdeggman View Post
    Realom size wasn;'t the issue.

    The issue was the number of like realms compteting agains each other.

    There are by definition in BR fewer wizards - so fewer people competing for sources.

    There are a relative plethora of different guilders. Guild only regents, landed regents with guilds, etc.

    All competing for guild levels
    The point I made was that all domains are of a similar size and therefore each competes with a similar number of other domains - so even though there aren't many wizards by birth, in practice there aren't many guilders, priests, rulers, etc either - so the competition levels for all holdings are similar.

    In theory I'd expect dozens of minor guilds and the like (since they are profitable even in small doses) in practice these 'tiny' domains aren't in the books - possibly because starting a realm from scratch is very difficult but more likely because the designers wanted it that way. I really don't see your contention that wizards face less competition in most areas of Cerilia as valid - even the fact that wizards tend to have far fewer actions simply slows the pace of the competition rather than its intensity.

    The topic seems to have moved from 'rebalance source holdings' to 'how do we stop everyone going for guild holdings' - the two are separate issues with the system in my view and the latter should be looked at separately to the former - not used as an answer to it.

    Quote Originally Posted by irdeggman View Post
    Merely working on soruce regents will only make it more skewed and "patchy" instead of looking at the big picture.
    That is why we are looking at the big picture - and working out how to move sources from being skewed to being balanced. Currently they simply don't work as they have no income - I really don't see your argument here I'm afraid, the issue is not 'how do we make sources better holdings than others' or 'how do we keep wizards - and only wizards - from misgenating' but 'how do we make source domains practically playable' - currently a wizard is utterly dependent on the charity of other regents just to get an action or two a season or must cripple themselves via alchemy to do so in lieu of a patron - that simply doesn't work very well for a full time player.

    The aim should be to give source regents the same independence taken for granted by other regents and give them the resources to undertake 3-4 actions a round, the existing system doesn't permit this barring a ridiculously generous patron - and the patron prevents the first by providing the second.

    Quote Originally Posted by irdeggman View Post
    But the only ones competing for sources are wizards (that is those who can use them). Only blooded wizards can find (and use) sources. It is one of their main benefits.
    Frankly given that most holdings are designed heavily to suit one class or the other (even BRCS RP rules heavily depend on class skills) this 'benefit' is of distinctly presentational value in my view - even in cases where druids, etc aren't allowed to rule sources. What in any event is the benefit gained? In a 'normal' situation holdings will split by character type to a significant degree in any event.

    Even with just 2/3 true mages in a realm there will be plenty of competition - as can be seen by the fact that most realms hold only 2-3 guilds, temples, or law holders - province rulers tend to be 1 per realm with only a handful of realms having 2/3, so in practice the wizards only rule isn't reducing the number of potential regents (and therefore the level of competition) at all.

    The other 'benefit' of sources, that they can't get contested by law holdings (in most rulesets) is also a drawback as they don't benefit from aid either - rivals have no need to care if the local regent supports the local mage or not. this could well make a source domain more subject to contests than a 'loyal' guild or temple.

    Quote Originally Posted by irdeggman View Post
    Back to looking at the system as a whole and not working on a single piece without looking at how all the pieces interact.
    We have been doing so from the outset - I'm not sure how you can argue otherwise. Are you really saying that 'most domains get 6-9 actions, mages get 1-3 if they grovel and beg continually and probably spend at least one of those paying for the other(s) - all domains are equally playable'?

    The issue from the outset has been the way the sources don't work and how we could make them work better without unbalancing the system - by all means argue about what method of calculating income is required or what level of income should be aimed for, or as you have been , whether we should use a different income type, but please do accept that if the wizard has only a third as many actions as other regents - if they are lucky - that the domain is inherently going to struggle to be playable and in particular, avoid players getting bored and wandering off (a PBEM curse) or explain how a domain level game can be played without using domain actions.

    Quote Originally Posted by irdeggman View Post
    Not quite.

    Every domain turn a regent gets 3 character actions and 3 domain actions.

    If he uses both his character action and his domain action at the same time (that is a full domain action) - that is the only time he gets to use his personal skills and feats to modify the domain action success.

    Court actions don't allow this addition.
    Exactly as I described then in the discussed context of a raid on guild holdings surely? The landed regent has the same ability to whomp up their three domain actions with a personal action as the mage - and has all their court actions on top. As soon as the mage starts trying to miscegenate - which seems to be your chief concern in this aspect of your argument against giving sources GB income - the extra income of the landed regent does let their court get involved - and the mage is going to be overwhelmed with ease, meaning that unless we overdo the income aspect of sources that wizards will find it practically impossible to miscegenate.

    Quote Originally Posted by irdeggman View Post
    Wizards (under the current rules) are pretty much locked into direct involvment in any domain action involving a source (thus a full domain action). Increasing income will not "fix" this issue.
    The increased (more accurately created) income was not intended to break the need for wizards to apply personal actions to domain actions (only an issue in games mixing adventure and domain level play in any event) but to give them the ability to have domain actions in domain level play in the first place - what is the landed domain ruler doing with personal actions if not supporting domain actions in any event? Presumably something more beneficial to them in which case the wizard's need to use personal actions on their domain actions is a weakness - not a benefit as you appear to be suggesting.


    The issue of court actions for source actions is a separate issue which has not been raised previously as far as I am aware, but depends heavily on the DM's view on apprentices, impact of province borders on requiring separate actions and the like. The main point of court actions seems to be to 'echo' the main action (i.e. create law in the capital with the personal+domain action, use the court to create law in the neighbouring 2 provinces as well) and this should be replicable by a fairly unobtrusive mechanic if need be. Realm spells are another matter but then they probably should be limited to full actions - although I suppose one could argue for echoing the same spell over a wider area using the court.

  7. #97
    Member Michael Romes's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Rhineland-Palatinate
    Posts
    71
    Downloads
    22
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by AndrewTall View Post
    ...
    Which suggests to me that there is a problem with the guild rules - guilds should not be an 'easy money' win that everyone automatically piles into. I've done it myself when playing a ruler as the benefits of trade routes are so great (esp in 2e) so know the problem well. I'm not entirely sure how to fix it - maybe with separate domain-level classes as noted - but something needs sorting out in my view, this is not however a 'source' point - it applies equally, if not far more so, to realm rulers and temple rulers.
    A centralized realm as a monolithic block owned by one regent (e.g. a Fighter in Anuire) is always at a disadvantage vs. cooperative realms with specialized regents for each holding.

    Unless the regent who want to control it all, dual or multiclasses to cover all holding types he may get the benefit of e.g. guild in that they earn money and can create trade routes that create even more money - but he will not earn the RP from the guilds and trade routes that a Thief regent would earn if he would hold those. And he would miss out on the free action (e.g. espionage of the thief regent. Same for temples - a fighter may rule temples and collect gold - but he misses out on the RP earned, the realms spells that could be cast and the free agitate action that a dedicated priest regent would have.

    And even if the one regent would dual- or multiclass to be able to collect RP from different holdings, he still would be limited by his bloodscore while a cooperative realm would earn far more RP as specialized regents would each have their own bloodscore.

    Imagine two realms of equal size and power at the start coming to be rivals:
    The one regent earns only part of the possible RP of his holdings and has only his own actions + his Lt.
    The cooperative realm has the province/perhaps law regent, priest, thief who can draw much more RP from their holdings as each have a bloodscore. And who have much more actions available than the one regent realm.
    Last edited by Michael Romes; 05-02-2021 at 05:17 PM.
    Michael Romes

  8. #98
    Senior Member Osprey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    1,475
    Downloads
    34
    Uploads
    8
    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Romes View Post
    A centralized realm as a monolithic block owned by one regent (e.g. a Fighter in Anuire) is always at a disadvantage vs. cooperative realms with specialized regents for each holding.

    Unless the regent who want to control it all, dual or multiclasses to cover all holding types he may get the benefit of e.g. guild in that they earn money and can create trade routes that create even more money - but he will not earn the RP from the guilds and trade routes that a Thief regent would earn if he would hold those. And he would miss out on the free action (e.g. espionage of the thief regent. Same for temples - a fighter may rule temples and collect gold - but he misses out on the RP earned, the realms spells that could be cast and the free agitate action that a dedicated priest regent would have.

    And even if the one regent would dual- or multiclass to be able to collect RP from different holdings, he still would be limited by his bloodscore while a cooperative realm would earn far more RP as specialized regents would each have their own bloodscore.

    Imagine two realms of equal size and power at the start coming to be rivals:
    The one regent earns only part of the possible RP of his holdings and has only his own actions + his Lt.
    The cooperative realm has the province/perhaps law regent, priest, thief who can draw much more RP from their holdings as each have a bloodscore. And who have much more actions available than the one regent realm.
    These are excellent points.
    As a DM having seen this in multiple campaigns, I can vouch that PC regent alliances dominate the world so long as they work together well. NPC regents not playing well with others seems to be the reason no Anuirean Empire has been reborn for 551 years (and wars between realms must be fairly commonplace at least on small scales with occasional big ones; common raiding and seasonal pillaging, occasional WARS where borders change - but these seem quite rare in most regions).

  9. #99
    Site Moderator AndrewTall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    2,476
    Downloads
    30
    Uploads
    2
    The problem is long term (or often even short term) co-operation, and absent co-operation taking over guilds for free money is a key aim for many other regents.

    So a traditional tabletop game group who co-operate will do very well as a team as you say, shift the game to a PBEM however and the odds of a co-operative group drops drastically - but the ruler/etc still needs GB.

    For many rulers losing out on a free action every 2-3 turns (the guild/etc being spread over more than 1 realm any one realm won't get all the action) and whatever RP they could get through vassalage (1/3 tops maybe?) is a small price to pay in exchange for guaranteed gold and minimal risk of the guilder turning against them.

  10. #100
    Senior Member Osprey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    1,475
    Downloads
    34
    Uploads
    8
    Quote Originally Posted by AndrewTall View Post
    The problem is long term (or often even short term) co-operation, and absent co-operation taking over guilds for free money is a key aim for many other regents.

    So a traditional tabletop game group who co-operate will do very well as a team as you say, shift the game to a PBEM however and the odds of a co-operative group drops drastically - but the ruler/etc still needs GB.
    That inherent need for either subjugation of or cooperation with surrounding regents in order to pay the bills creates the dramatic tension for landed regents that my campaigns thrive on. Getting gold from the guilders through tribute or law collections is almost a necessity if you don't want to be conquered by stronger neighbors.

    Wizards needing gold to pay for sources and realm magics is a central theme for them, too.

    In my experience, wizard regents are the most dependent on Adventure gains to fund their work in the core setting. Birthright was designed for adventure to be what all successful regents did from time to time, and the best ones would do it even more!

    I created an Adventure domain action with level-scaled results to replace hands-on adventuring, including for NPCs. It's not brilliant, but I don't think you can play Birthright with core rules without adventuring being a normal part of character income. Something like that can stand in for adventuring in a PBEM and for NPCs.

    That being said, I ran BRCS 3.0 for my 1st full length (tabletop) campaign, and I happily integrated Virtual Guilds for extra income from local sources and trade routes. I also made rules for a "wondrous structure" (25 GB a level, late game goal) Wizard Academy a wealthy mage might build over his strongest source. Funding such a thing would absolutely require either rich patronage and/or immense adventuring gains. We found Alchemy realm spells generally weren't worth it unless you're desperate.

    Currently I am running a Pathfinder BR campaign. A sea change in that system is that crafting magic items cost only money and time but not experience points (there is a feat for non-casters to craft magic items too, but I don't allow that one). This means all spellcasters - even magicians - with a few levels of experience could start making serious profit (as much as half the value of a finished item if sold at market price, to a max of 500 gp per day profit crafting 1000gp worth of market value each 8-hour work day. 7 days of the 8 day week could earn an artificer 3500gp a week!
    This makes other professional incomes laughable in comparison. In a Pathfinder world, artificers can get pretty darn wealthy!
    So naturally, creating an institution to band artificers into a guild and take a cut while facilitating production and competitive sales is a natural next step, hehe.

    So that's how I have dealt with wizard money issues as a tabletop BR DM.

    The other lopsided issue was TIME.
    1. Realm Spells are over-the-top time consuming and expensive to research (1 month per spell level!). I cut their research times down to about 1/3 (Realm Spell L1-3 = 1 month research, L4-6 = 2 months, L7-9 = 3 months), and have it cost 1 GB per month of study. Even these are still taking huge chunks of time away for a regent character to learn any realm spells, keeping them fairly few in the world. I have found that blooded spellcaster Lieutenants (clerics and mages) have the most time for realm spell research, and can make good stand-ins if you trust them.
    2. Sources and Realm Actions
    This was the biggest problem. Other regents can rule and contest multiple holdings at as time, multiplying their rates of growth compared to wizards. A wizard carving out a new source domain can take decades! Which might sound great in a dusty history book, but sucks for PC source regents who thought it was going to be exciting to build their own source domain.

    I really like how personal source magic is. I like that a mage needs to be on site to shape and grow the flows of mebhaighal in a province, or disrupt a rival's source.
    I once tried an arcane court system, but it always felt a little clumsy and silly.
    Now I use something simpler and very easy:
    When a source regent Rules or Contests a source, each blooded mage Lt. bonded to a source regent can Rule or Contest one additional source in the same realm as part of a realm action. So an established source regent with 3 mage lieutenants could potentially rule 4 sources a month, equivalent to other regents with a level 6 court.

    Using BRCS skill bonuses for full domain actions, one would also apply each Lt's individual skill bonus in their respective provinces. (In my game I grant +1 per +5 skill bonus in the key skill, which is also Pathfinder friendly).

    I've liked this system so much in future campaigns I will apply it to all regents, making clear that a domain skill bonus can only ever be applied in 1 province at a time, and thus any regent can benefit from having gifted Lieutenants who can apply their own domain skill bonuses to additional provinces as part of a realm action.
    Last edited by Osprey; 05-05-2021 at 02:54 PM.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. Family wizards
    By Don E in forum The Royal Library
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 07-20-2004, 11:58 AM
  2. Wizards And Sorcerers
    By Osprey in forum BRCS 3.0/3.5 Edition
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 01-24-2004, 10:23 PM
  3. Wizards n' stuff
    By Mark_Aurel in forum The Royal Library
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 06-02-2003, 07:12 PM
  4. Stealing from Wizards
    By morgramen in forum The Royal Library
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 02-11-2003, 08:51 AM

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.