Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 19
  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    43
    Downloads
    43
    Uploads
    0

    100 Pages of New Rules Needed

    I see what went wrong. TO much details.
    Developers of BRCS 3.5 where on right track after death of project all went wrong.

    Hmmmm should elven horse have DEX 15 of 17 ...
    I think Think Muden have soft U

    I don't know maybe i am just mad there is nothing new for Br and 4e rotten and they are printing FR for 7th time.

    maybe we should make some 100 pages of basic rules that all stick to that + wiki. right now every player of BR have its on system and rule.
    Last edited by Thelandrin; 09-29-2008 at 04:50 PM. Reason: Bad language is unnecessary.
    Vosgaard's Veliki hrast.

  2. #2
    Site Moderator kgauck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Springfield Mo
    Posts
    3,562
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    There is no such thing as too much detail. Its much easier to ignore content that doesn't fit your idea of something than it does to invent new material on your own.

    I wouldn't begrudge another setting any success either.

    I'm not sure why anyone would imagine there is nothing new for BR. Dhoesone and Danigau have been described recently, characters and locations articulated, the history of the breakup of the Imperial Temple and the successor domains has been described.

    The BRCS 3.5 is a document, clear and easy to use. What new hundred pages are you looking for?

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    43
    Downloads
    43
    Uploads
    0
    I was talking about rules not events. Unified rules for this community. 100 pages of rules
    Last edited by hazard; 09-27-2008 at 06:10 PM.
    Vosgaard's Veliki hrast.

  4. #4
    Administrator Green Knight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    1,012
    Downloads
    20
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by hazard View Post
    I see what went wrong. TO much details.
    Developers of BRCS 3.5 where on right track after death of project all went wrong.

    Hmmmm should elven horse have DEX 15 of 17 ...
    I think Think Muden have soft U

    I don't know maybe i am just mad there is nothing new for Br and 4e rotten and they are printing FR for 7th time.

    maybe we should make some 100 pages of basic rules that all stick to that + wiki. right now every player of BR have its on system and rule.
    Keep the language civil. And please contribute to the matter under discussion rather than go on a rant that has nothing to do about the naming conventions used.
    Last edited by Thelandrin; 09-29-2008 at 04:50 PM. Reason: Quote edited too.
    Cheers
    Bjørn
    DM of Ruins of Empire II PbeM

  5. #5
    Site Moderator kgauck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Springfield Mo
    Posts
    3,562
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    Given that a rules document exists, the BRCS for 3.5, why do you suppose that a new document will be better recieved?

    If the document is too similar to the current doc, it will gain few new adherents, if its too dissimilar, those who are happy with the current doc will stick with that.

    I think the current document represents about as much consensus as you are going to get.

  6. #6
    Senior Member Elton Robb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
    Posts
    571
    Downloads
    1
    Uploads
    0
    I have to agree with Ken on this point. This is going to work, really. We have about enough of what is going on in BR than anything at this point. The 3.5 BRCS on this site is what everyone really needs, and we can continue to make up the details as we go along.

    There is another factor to Birthright you haven't even considered. It's a fantasy world. It's not meant to be medieval or mythic Europe. It just uses Medieval or Renaissance Europe as a model and then builds on from that. Rich and Colin built Birthright to what they think Birthright should be.
    Regent of Medoere

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Belgrade, Serbia
    Posts
    113
    Downloads
    46
    Uploads
    0
    What BRCS needs the most right now is a PDF version.

  8. #8
    Site Moderator kgauck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Springfield Mo
    Posts
    3,562
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    Its in the downloads section of this web site.

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Belgrade, Serbia
    Posts
    113
    Downloads
    46
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by kgauck View Post
    Its in the downloads section of this web site.
    Birthright 3ed revision is not the same as the DOC files. For example, it doesn't contain the unique Paladin classes detailed in the DOCs. The Human cultures in PDF give bonuses to skills, while the ones in DOCs give class skills and require Humans to spend their 4 bonus skill points at first level on racial class skills. Feats are also different.

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Belgrade, Serbia
    Posts
    113
    Downloads
    46
    Uploads
    0
    Speaking of rules, I noticed that most, if not all, characters in the wiki are detailed with VP and WP instead of HP, but I failed to find an reference to VP and WP in both versions of BRCS. Is there any post or wiki article that details the rules used to implement VP and WP in Birthright?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. Should the BRCS 3e wiki pages be editable?
    By Vicente in forum BRWiki Discussions
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 07-11-2008, 07:42 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.