Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 20 of 20
  1. #11
    Site Moderator AndrewTall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    2,476
    Downloads
    30
    Uploads
    2
    In the case of the new coins I'd see the benefits as temporary - unless the technology is continually regenerated. Crooked merchants think of ways to shave the new coins, corrupt bureaucrats start debasing the coins to pay for increased expenditure, etc. Unless the ruler frequently takes action to keep the system clean and running it should naturally clog over time as petty greed and interests take their toll. It is quite possible for a mint to lose money by failing to control costs, or phase out coins with manufacturing losses and the like.

    Instead of a permanent advance you could see the mint as a wonder that need periodic maintenance - an action every year or so, but while operational law and guild holdings act as a level higher for example. (Because it is easier to collect taxes when you control the money supply and the money has recognised and agreed value, trade likewise). The mint might need ongoing RP expenditure however as the regent needs to keep a close eye on it.

    Similarly a university could boost maximum temple holdings or even province level as long as the regent keeps it teaching the right curriculum to the right people.

  2. #12

    Post petty note

    Overkill or overdose of rules should be avoided. I take the BR PC game as inspiration. The expert mode can be learned swiftly, if BR becomes R&R instead of D&D than obviously the new efforts are lacking quality of the original crew which made BR. R&R is Rules & Regulations.

    Of second: Could people find a way to specify, if they are talking pbem, boardgame or role-play or strategy at least by top-priority?

  3. #13
    Site Moderator kgauck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Springfield Mo
    Posts
    3,562
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by ploesch View Post
    For instance, I'm gonna pick on KGauck, what effect on province/holdings would changing the money actually have in measurable game terms?
    In general, I would say a mechanic like this is good for going from "no" to "yes" for a bigger improvement. Say you want to keep a lid on the Rule action for provinces. But a player wants to rule up a province, this kind of thing might be what you do, and when its complete, then you tell the player because of the new efficiencies, you can now rule up your largest province.

    To rule up a small province (1-2) I'd go with agricultural reform, or reducing the manorial control of labor (shifting in a minor way from serfdom to yeomanry). I would make the test easier (a bit) by lowering DC's on tests, or having fewer tests, though slight adjustments here have a large effect, so its easy to go too far.

    Or it could be a question of going from "no" to "yes" in a role playing context, such as something the state can do to get the support of the guilds (move them from indifferent to friendly).

    Properly, coinage reform is a lubricant for trade and reduces the costs of trade and government. Generally computer games are better at tracking incremental changes in these kinds of areas. You can imagine having an efficiency factor that gets multiplied by taxes, trade, and spending, and as the ruler successfully performs relevant actions, this factor improves. But that adds a layer of bookeeping. So instead, I recommend using something like this to go from "no" to "yes".

    Another trick, is to put some penalties on a domain at game start. Revenues have been gradually falling under the new PC's predecessor, and now things are in bad shape. So the PC has to complete several reforms to restore revenues to normal game levels. 2-3 are a good number. So game start = 50% revenue penalty, 1 reform =75%, 2 reforms =100%, or game start = 40%, 1 reform = 60%, 2 reforms = 80%, and 3 reforms = 100%. And even after that you can still do these kinds of things to go from "no" to "yes".

    The idea is not to create new rules (I wouldn't wish that on anyone), but problem solving mechanics to give players something to do, or provide a way to make improvements that have a DM scratching their head.

    In fact, I would argue these are not new rules, instead this is a standard extended test, contextualized to a specific problem (reform of the domain). Apply mechanics and ideas that are already in the core rules when possible.

  4. #14
    Senior Member ploesch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    182
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    OK, that's great, thank you for the response.
    When you play the game of thrones you win or you die.
    George R. R. Martin - A song of Ice and Fire

  5. #15
    Senior Member The Swordgaunt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Bergen, Norway
    Posts
    152
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by ploesch View Post
    I would suggest that when a player comes up with an idea they want to implement, consider what practical effect it would have, and discuss the effect that the player is looking for it to have, and then use a currently available action (set of actions) that would achieve that effect.
    All nitpickery aside, this is sage advice.

    As to the other comments on the short-term effects of the much debated currency reform, I have two more gold to add. Granted, this is not a one-and-done ruling. Guilders and perhaps even corrupt temples might counterfeit the new coins or shave the rims. This is an age old problem, and this might function as a plot-hook (who is circulating the fake Crowns) or as a contested law-action. It might lead to as much, or as little, action and/or intrigue as the DM chooses.

    To address Pauper's concerns of turning BR into the Court of the Rule-Lawyers, let me just say that for my part at least, that is as far from what I wish as possible. I cannot speak on behalf of the other posters, but I believe that they are in agreement on this issue. However, there is a fine line between turning BR into a mirror image of Rolemaster, and to make the regent-aspect more realistic. I personally enjoy adding touches of RW-concerns to the already overworked regents. I am of the belief that a game without diversity is a boring game (not by this intended that the games run by my fellow posters are dull - far from it).

    A regent who decides to launch his realm into one war after another will find that his provinces will drop in level as more and more of the young and strong are called out to serve. Additionally, while martial reforms might come easily, the issue of keeping the armies in the field might leave the regent in the debt of guilders or other regents.

    On the other hand, a regent who focuses on diplomacy and "nation-building" will have other concerns. These could, and should, be as challenging and rewarding as the first example. This is where agrarian-, monetary-, and logistical reforms come in. I like to throw in a bit of both in my campaigns, as that makes me, and my players, happy.

    To end this post by picking up the thread from earlier in this topic, I wish to underline the quote from Ploesh one more time. Figure out what you want, then how to implement it.
    -Harald

    Today, we were kidnapped by hill folk never to be seen again. It was the best day ever.

    Blog

  6. #16
    On the other hand, a regent who focuses on diplomacy and "nation-building" will have other concerns. These could, and should, be as challenging and rewarding as the first example. This is where agrarian-, monetary-, and logistical reforms come in. I like to throw in a bit of both in my campaigns, as that makes me, and my players, happy.

    To end this post by picking up the thread from earlier in this topic, I wish to underline the quote from Ploesh one more time. Figure out what you want, then how to implement it.

    This is sage advice, especially for the table top level. You might want mroe formalized rules for the PBEM level, but for a small campaign, being flexable is always a good policy for a DM, I've found.

    As for the whole "too many rules!" bit...yeah, I agree. I hate nitpicking. I hate minutae. That's not why I play games. My whole reason for bringing this topic up was more along the lines of, "What do heroic kings do?". What if you want to build the library of Alexandria, or a museum based around your adventuring glories, or the first national parks, or Cerilia's first zoo, or find a way to make demihuman communities in your realm work with the human communities more readily...y'know, heroic feats that you can do as a leader of a nation or organization.

    Sure, "Make an adventure out of it." is the obvious response, but I figured the whole idea still merited conversation. For me, at least, the "Big, cool draw." of Birthright, the shiny neon sign that brings in new players, is the whole novelty of running a whole kingdom when you're starting out. Your first level PCs are kings and merchant princes and archpriests and court wizards and it's all uphill from there! So that's generally what I keep in mind when thinking about Birthright stuff, at the core of it all. "Is this something cool for a party of hero-kings to do?"

  7. #17
    Senior Member ploesch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    182
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    I haven't run or played a BRCS campaign in a while. My current group just doesn't get the domain level stuff, ad prefer High fantasy settings. <sigh>

    The last time I GMed I went through ruins and made a list of specials which I then created costs and benefits for. I also created a list of special buildings/actions the players could build/take. Of course, it was never as simple as a decree and a build action to make it happen.

    Realm Specials? Like Elinie, I believe, where according to ruins of empire, levys are treated as irregulars because the regent instituted mandatory military service.

    The thing is, how do you make rules that balance these things? What I did there was require that the regent have a standing army of 1 unit for every 1 or 2 provinces or maybe for each province of 3 or something (I forget) or he'd lose the special. I felt this balanced a powerful ability fairly well and kept the realm in balance with what Ruins said it had for a standing army.

    I think something like a Zoo could be handled much the same way. A zoo could be part of the "Royal Court" so the court would be considered 1 level higher for purposes, but I'd require the regent to always maintain a court of 2 and have to spend 1 more GB (per season) to maintain the zoo. Or the zoo could be public, and increase loyalty of the province it's in. Of course, the zoo could also be the center of many events and a launching point for many adventures (animal escapes/stolen, you hear of a rare anial that would be great for the collection, great captain opposes the caging of animals (or thinks it's too dangerous), lots of possibilities). As far as initial creation, it would be a extended set of actions similar to minting a new coin, but definetely require a build action in there.

    A Library might generate RP, but would have a cost associated with it. Maybe give it levels, and each level generates more RP, but a build and maintenace cost similar to building and maintaining a castle. It would also be a great launching point for adventures.
    When you play the game of thrones you win or you die.
    George R. R. Martin - A song of Ice and Fire

  8. #18
    I haven't run or played a BRCS campaign in a while. My current group just doesn't get the domain level stuff, ad prefer High fantasy settings. <sigh>
    I still don't get this "Birthright isn't high fantasy." thing. Yeah, the kingdoms are a little weaker than your archtypical high fantasy setting, but that's because first level PCs are supposed to be able to run them.

    Seriously, you walk around with special powers you get for having, literarly, the blood of the fallen gods running through your veins, and the very land itself rewards you for epic acts of heroism or villainy. It's a setting where going out with your friends and slaying ogres and capturing lost treasure can be seen as a legitimate political strategy(Increase regency, fame, get cash for funding, improve loyalty levels...). I'm not saying you can't play the game as low fantasy, but I don't know where the community got the collective idea that it's supposed to default there.

    While we're on the subject, might I suguest adapting King of the Giantdowns? It makes a great introductary campaign, because the goal is to become a regent for a land that's never had one. So the whole process of forming enough of a bond with the land to actually create holdings, along with the adventure of taming the land, bringing the humans, dwarves, and indipendent humanoids together, and defeating the White Witch, bandit tribes, and Gurhail, all make for a lot of adventure with the slow, subtle addition of the responsibilities of rulership. The whole process of earning the ghost of the cloud giant king's respect isn't just an epic adventure, but a chance to really express for new players what the setting means by regents literarly having a mystic bond with the land.

  9. #19
    Site Moderator kgauck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Springfield Mo
    Posts
    3,562
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by ThatSeanGuy View Post
    I still don't get this "Birthright isn't high fantasy." thing. Seriously, you walk around with special powers you get for having, literarly, the blood of the fallen gods running through your veins, and the very land itself rewards you for epic acts of heroism or villainy.
    Because these elements are not fantastic, they are the default assumptions about how the world worked until about 2-300 years ago. In many ways these ideas are still with us, as they derive from deep psychological needs to deify heroes, and then sacrifice them for the good of the community.

    Its low fantasy because we take these historical assumptions that the hero or the king were chosen by divine forces and had special powers and a right to rule others, and ramped it up slightly.

  10. #20
    Senior Member ploesch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    182
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Well, in Birthright Magic is rare, especially in relation to Forgotten realms, Greyhawk or Dragon Lance, the settings most of us started with. Humans must be blooded to wield true magic. Which means human Magi are a new phenomenom. This means that Magical Items, weapons and armor are rare also (as they should be).

    The rarity of magic definetely lends to the setting not feeling like High Fantasy.

    Also, when you get to the nuts and bolts of running a realm, your character ends up dealing with mundane problems at least some of the time.

    Don't get me wrong, I love the setting. I like that the characters have to rely on their personal ability more than the Magical armor they took from A dragons horde.

    In the strictest sense Birth Right is High Fantasy, but I think that most RPG players would consider it a closer to Low Fantasy setting. More Athur Pendragon than Rand Al'Thor so to speak.

    I'll consider giant downs. I own it, but have never read it. Sounds like it might be a great way to reintroduce the setting.
    When you play the game of thrones you win or you die.
    George R. R. Martin - A song of Ice and Fire

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.