Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 63
  1. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    439
    Downloads
    31
    Uploads
    0
    Reducing 1 level seems a good fix, though perhaps not very enticing. I haven't played many games where holdings are contested because it's just too costly.

    I think anyone should be able to contest any holding. You just can't apply your own holding levels against holdings not of your type, except for Law holdings.

  2. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by Rowan View Post
    You're talking about Contest actions? What is deficient about the current system? What are you trying to correct or improve?
    First I was just reading 4th edition and thinking of a way to have Birthright 4th edition match it. Once I thought of this I started to realize the possibilities.

    1. For people that have read 4th edition and come to our site, the idea of attack and defense will be instantly familer. They will understand the concept of attack and defense and how to apply it to other holdings. (Need to contest another holding an attack roll vs. a defense roll fits nicely)

    2. Having a single number for a holding actions will speed up the game. Need to do a contest ... well my attack is a blah blah. Need to rule ... my attack is blah blah vs. a base defense.

    3. Feats and powers can now be applied to those numbers for attack and defense.

    There are other reason but that is what I can think of on the top of my head. Certainly the old system wasn't broke at all, but it certain has a 3rd edition feel to it.

    -BB

  3. #13
    Special Guest (Donor)
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Spain
    Posts
    532
    Downloads
    11
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Rowan View Post
    I think anyone should be able to contest any holding. You just can't apply your own holding levels against holdings not of your type, except for Law holdings.
    I agree on this. But on our campaign we changed that rule to force interactions between different regents.

  4. #14
    Birthright Developer irdeggman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Virginia Beach, Virginia
    Posts
    3,945
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by bbeau22 View Post
    2. Having a single number for a holding actions will speed up the game. Need to do a contest ... well my attack is a blah blah. Need to rule ... my attack is blah blah vs. a base defense.

    -BB

    Don't forget to account for RP expenditures - thus it is no longer a "set number".

    IMO RP is not accounted for then there is no point in having holdings at all.
    Duane Eggert

  5. #15
    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
    Don't forget to account for RP expenditures - thus it is no longer a "set number".

    RP is part of it being an opposed roll - personally I don't see the difficulty in opposed rolls - 'her roll is your DC' sort of thing.

    The question is how you deal with RP bidding - silent bids? Refundable deposits? One/Two/etc round only bids? Max bid equal to bloodline modifier per round? Etc.

    Without RP bids you get holdings flipping rapidly, not good when they represent certain faction types. Book-keeping vs Simulation maybe a recurrent them e in a 4e conversion...

  6. #16
    Ehrshegh of Spelling Thelandrin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,086
    Downloads
    68
    Uploads
    0
    4E is specifically about balance in all its glorious and flawed aspects. If you really want a "balanced" 4E Birthright, why are you perpetuating the "wizards are useless" stereotype that has hounded them since at least the BRCS?

  7. #17
    I had a big long rant I was about to post but figured I would keep most of it to myself. Just a bit too negative.

    I really respect everyone's opinion and look forward to helping this transition going forward.

    My only thought for everyone is that if we are going to make a 4th edition verison of our beloved Birthright lets go for it. If we can fit Birthright mechanics into the new 4th edition system we should be trying to do that first, and not adding layers of different rules and systems. If you don't like the 4th edition mechanics ... well there is always 3.5 edition that will not go away.

    I am just afraid that we are going to create a 4th edition system that resembles 4th edition on the outside but the guts will be a mix of 2nd/3rd/3.5/homebrew. Not a single person outside of our group will be interested in it because it will be too unfamiler, and 3-4 years down the road when the only real set of rules is 4th edition, we will look at our bastard edition and realized we missed the boat.

  8. #18
    Special Guest (Donor)
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Spain
    Posts
    532
    Downloads
    11
    Uploads
    0
    RP bids on offensive: you just say how many RP you intend to spend and that's it.

    RP bids on defensive: in his turn each player states his RP pool to bid and how much she is going to spend in a single action at most. Easy and neutral She can make exceptions for some actions, provinces,... but usually the simple rule works very well.

    About the useless wizards, not allowing everyone contesting them is a first step to give them more protection (although Rule Province and no-income continue screwing them pretty fast ).

  9. #19
    Ehrshegh of Spelling Thelandrin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,086
    Downloads
    68
    Uploads
    0
    That's just status quo, Vicente. The wizards couldn't be contested or even seen except by other wizards, yet they had minimal (if any) income and were completely hosed by Rule Province.

    If you wanted to throw wizards a bone, you could allow sources to generate income like laws and allow them to bid regency (but not source levels) against Rule Province.

  10. #20
    Birthright Developer irdeggman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Virginia Beach, Virginia
    Posts
    3,945
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by bbeau22 View Post
    I had a big long rant I was about to post but figured I would keep most of it to myself. Just a bit too negative.

    I really respect everyone's opinion and look forward to helping this transition going forward.

    My only thought for everyone is that if we are going to make a 4th edition verison of our beloved Birthright lets go for it. If we can fit Birthright mechanics into the new 4th edition system we should be trying to do that first, and not adding layers of different rules and systems. If you don't like the 4th edition mechanics ... well there is always 3.5 edition that will not go away.

    I am just afraid that we are going to create a 4th edition system that resembles 4th edition on the outside but the guts will be a mix of 2nd/3rd/3.5/homebrew. Not a single person outside of our group will be interested in it because it will be too unfamiler, and 3-4 years down the road when the only real set of rules is 4th edition, we will look at our bastard edition and realized we missed the boat.

    First we have to look at what is setting material versus what is flavor material.

    Here is a thread with that subject:

    Flavor versus game mechanics:
    http://www.dndworlds.net/forums/showthread.php?t=1884&highlight=flavor


    Now if you want to only play 4th ed and wave your hand over it and say it is Birthright - feel free.

    But IMO you will be making a huge mistake.

    One of the good things about 2nd ed that was watered down tremendously in 3.5 was the notion of "settings".

    In 2nd ed each setting was distinctly different (well a most of them were in any event). Each had componets that defined the setting in a way that separated it from the others.

    In 3.5 this line was deliberately blurred due to economics (and IMO this will continue with 4th ed and anything subsequent). The idea being that any book or product created could be used in any setting. This was in direct contrast to the 2nd ed philosophy.

    So IMO define what is and what is not Brithright and then work towards using the 4th ed mechancs to explain it. Not do it the other way.
    Duane Eggert

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. How do I establish a holding
    By Bryon in forum The Royal Library
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 06-09-2007, 02:57 PM
  2. With a holding (0), am I a regent?
    By mayiuchung in forum The Royal Library
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 02-07-2007, 09:02 PM
  3. Create holding.
    By Question in forum BRCS 3.0/3.5 Edition
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 12-05-2005, 04:41 PM
  4. Contest Holding
    By Arius Vistoon in forum BRCS 3.0/3.5 Edition
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 08-05-2003, 08:31 PM
  5. The Loyalty Holding.
    By Birthright-L in forum The Royal Library
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 04-24-2002, 03:15 PM

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.