Skill Expansions and Possible New Skills.

[bbeau22]

Which leaves off-camera an open field. We could have skills independent of level (i.e. you can in skill if you use the skill in practice but not simply by going up a level) in which case we can have as many as we like. As long as they don't impact adventure play there should be no issue.

One easy option is to have as skills 'manage people, manage law, manage commerce, manage faith, manage mebhaighl' (but with cooler names) and just figure out an advancement path. All skills are open to all people but with the expectation that spending skill points on one means you don't spend it on another - encouraging people to hold only one holding type until they become very skilled and max out one of the skills.

I'd then look to restrict RP and GB depending on skill - if you can't manage the holding not only do the people look to other leadership they are less efficient.

Bloodline score could then cap the RP generation, and if bloodline is kept as an ability, the modifier could be applied to any of the domain skills.

We could have some bloodline abilities then give bonuses to ruling provinces or one type of holding, encouraging scions of Anduiras & Reynir to rule law, Brenna to rule guilds, Vorynn&Azrai Source, Basaia & Masela temples (say).

This sounds pretty good. I just came up with a good idea ...

Have a skill for each holding type. Actions that involve the holding you use the skill as the check.

The good part is for holdings that you receive 100% regency from, your skill check matches that of a skill you are profient in (half-level/+5/ability modifer.) Holdings you receive 50% regency your skill is non-profient (no +5.) If you can't receive regency from the holding you can't use the skill.

Which holdings can you receive regency from? 2nd Edition style.

What do you think?

-BB

[kgauck]

We could have some bloodline abilities then give bonuses to ruling provinces or one type of holding, encouraging scions of Anduiras & Reynir to rule law, Brenna to rule guilds, Vorynn&Azrai Source, Basaia & Masela temples (say).

Basaia gave the mantle of Law to Avani, so I'd make Anduiras and Basaia the Law.
Masela was goddess of the sea is mainly patronized by fishermen and sailors, suggesting guilds.
Then I'd move Reynir to Temples (but only because Sources is crowded and Temples are empty).

[AndrewTall]

Avani seems fairly likely to have paladins - several are noted in both RoE and Cities of the Sun. Also the ties of king over land (outside the cities anyway) seem weak, so I'd keep Avani as temple focused (this may of course simply be prejudice reading in a RL cultural trait).

Erik's two druid orders have near total control over the culture in the highlands indicating to me that he should identify with law - sources being a possibility for the more traditional druid approach to life.

I saw Masela as more sea = subsistence/survival than sea = trade. Nesirie's droopiness since Deismaar fits in my mind with the priesthood as I find clerics depressing, I also struggle to see Haelyn's wife as a wheeler-dealer type. That said what fits Nesirie's priests now and what fitted Masela may be two very different things.

Of course we haven't mentioned Manors, awnmebhaighl and other non-standard holding types.

[irdeggman]

Erik's two druid orders have near total control over the culture in the highlands indicating to me that he should identify with law - sources being a possibility for the more traditional druid approach to life.

Except that "law" is not something inherently part of the Rjurik culture. Individualism is and that at its core is in direct conflict with law.

So I would not have Erik identified with law at all.

Temples and sources sure (sources because they are "nature" related - not because of any special arcane magic connection via Erik, which there shouldn't be).

[kgauck]

Though I disagree with Andrew, I only disagree in degree. Avani is more law than Erik. But aside from that, I think Andrew has the better argument than irdeggman.

• "Except that "law" is not something inherently part of the Rjurik culture."
  
  Law is a huge part of Rjurik culture and its managed by the skalds, who are established and protected by the temples. The skalds memorize the law and adjudicate the law. The druids themselves advise the rulers on matters of law and justice. Many of the Rjurik festivals are organized around legislative assemblies. Both of the cultures that the Rjurik are based on take the law very seriously, though neither established a state until late in their histories.
  
  
• "Individualism is at its core is in direct conflict with law."
  
  If by "individulism" you mean "anarchy" then I agree, but if you mean "liberty" then you are absolutely wrong. Liberty require the rule of law to restrain the powerful who both have the capability and the desire to subjugate others. While the law can be used to impose tyranny, liberty cannot be achieved without the law for any group larger than a single person. Rjurik culture is not an example of lawlessness in which the strong dominate the weak by force. You're thinking of the Vos.

[Rowan]

"Administration" speaks to me of paper-pushing and logistics, management of fiscal resources. I think it would be worthwhile to distinguish it from "Rulership" as the skill of making wise decisions, arbitrating/mediating disputes, organizing people, leading and inspiring, resolving conflicts, and making prudent decisions about matters of justice. I believe that for most of history, monarchs have left much of the administration to aides, councilors, and cronies. The best may be masterful administrators themselves, but even very good ones (like Winston Churchill) may not be gifted at administration. They can still be so good at ruling and organizing that they will be very effective.

So I see a suite of three skills still appropriate as additions to the skill list: Administrate (INT), Rulership (WIS or CHA), Warcraft (an argument could be made for any of mental ability scores).

In 4e add these three skills and let Scions choose one of them as a trained skill (possibly appropriate to derivation). I do think there needs to be some sort of Regent or Ruler class, template, or other mechanism apart from adventure class level to determine how effective a character is at Domain rule. This mechanism should include access to these skills and possibly allow extra feats that play off of them or just Skill Focus on them.

[kgauck]

The Renaissance is the beginning of actual administration where more than a handful of scribes were required to conduct the business of the state. Many kings got by with a single secretary.

In the condensed 4e skill set, all the skills associated with running stuff can be rolled into one skill.

War is a different business that government, of course.

[bbeau22]

"Administration" speaks to me of paper-pushing and logistics, management of fiscal resources. I think it would be worthwhile to distinguish it from "Rulership" as the skill of making wise decisions, arbitrating/mediating disputes, organizing people, leading and inspiring, resolving conflicts, and making prudent decisions about matters of justice. I believe that for most of history, monarchs have left much of the administration to aides, councilors, and cronies. The best may be masterful administrators themselves, but even very good ones (like Winston Churchill) may not be gifted at administration. They can still be so good at ruling and organizing that they will be very effective.

So I see a suite of three skills still appropriate as additions to the skill list: Administrate (INT), Rulership (WIS or CHA), Warcraft (an argument could be made for any of mental ability scores).

In 4e add these three skills and let Scions choose one of them as a trained skill (possibly appropriate to derivation). I do think there needs to be some sort of Regent or Ruler class, template, or other mechanism apart from adventure class level to determine how effective a character is at Domain rule. This mechanism should include access to these skills and possibly allow extra feats that play off of them or just Skill Focus on them.

I am of the other camp that you don't need a different class for to see how effective a character is at Domain rule. The question I have is why wouldn't an experienced level 20 wizard be better at controlling his realm than a level 1 wizard. Why wouldn't a level 10 cleric be better at running a temple system than a level 3.

If we have a system of feats and powers that blooded characters can take that give different bonuses to ruling their chosen domain, they can take them while they level up to be more effective leaders. Its like being a specialist in some ways. Some rogues are good influencing a group of people while others are good at dungeon survival. Why not include another rogue type that is good at running a guild operation. Instead of taking feats that allow them to remove traps better they take feats that let them make more money with each guild they control. Lets be honest, how many traps have many rogue guilders disarmed while running a guild operation?

There is no reason to create a seperate system for holding feats. The only thing I can see that isn't attached to regular levels might be blood powers that effect domains.

-BB

[kgauck]

I am of the other camp that you don't need a different class for to see how effective a character is at Domain rule.

Why do you suppose that one who spends 20 years swinging a sword as a fighter has the same ability to command an army as someone who spent 20 years commanding soldiers? Doing a task and supervising a task are entirely different skill sets.

[Vicente]

Why do you suppose that one who spends 20 years swinging a sword as a fighter has the same ability to command an army as someone who spent 20 years commanding soldiers? Doing a task and supervising a task are entirely different skill sets.

Probably both examples are going to end translated as the same level fighter in the end (or roughly similar).