Page 3 of 9 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 88
  1. #21
    Ehrshegh of Spelling Thelandrin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,086
    Downloads
    68
    Uploads
    0
    Considering that we long ago diverged wildly from the actual discussion about the character, I've split these off into a new thread.

    Ius Hibernicum, in nomine juris. Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur.

  2. #22
    Site Moderator kgauck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Springfield Mo
    Posts
    3,562
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    I would not so easily overlook the likelihood the notion that people appreciate strait 3.5. The newcomer knows 3.5. From there, something consistent with the original boxed set (which people still ask for) and the BRCS are two ways to go. For reasons already mentioned, I think the spirit of the original materials is a significantly better approach.

  3. #23
    Birthright Developer irdeggman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Virginia Beach, Virginia
    Posts
    3,945
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by kgauck View Post
    Characters should be 3.5, but not BRCS. I refuse to write characters for that piece of trash. Its entirely worthless in my opinion, and possible worse. I am not aware of a single regular contributor who has used any part of it until Namesless One added characters on the Southern Coast. It is absurd to consider it the standard for the wiki.

    Then make them house-rules and so label then. What you (and apparently others) have doen is clog up the wiki with a bunch of house-rules that are not identied as such nor are they delinieated so people like Sorontor can readily tell what system is being used - this is totally unacceptable and much more trashy then a single set of rules (any set).

    The point of the BRCS was to establish a standard for this site (which includes the wiki by the way).

    The revised chap 2 was sanctioned (that it is was voted on with a greater majority (i.e 75 % in favor, everyone active at that time got to vote so it was as openly inclusive as it could be) and is considered "official" in that regard.

    Rejecting it so off handed is just wrong. A lot of time was spent (over 1 year) of on line discussions and mini votes along the way to develop the revised chapt 2.


    Since you seem to have no reason to play along then please do not add to the confusion.
    Duane Eggert

  4. #24
    Birthright Developer irdeggman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Virginia Beach, Virginia
    Posts
    3,945
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Oh and Kenneth the point of the reliance on mechanics is a reflection of how 3.5 works.

    In 2nd ed monsters were created in pretty much any way the DM wished - there were no real standards at all.

    In 3.5 monsters are created using formulas and guidleines very strict design criteria.

    Now if you are creating character using 3.5 without accoutning for the mechanical strictness of the system then you are already greatly nto the house rule area.

    I know how much you use house rules in your games and there is nothing wrong with that but in a discussion or information post it is very important to make clear where the basis is coming from and not assuming that people can read the author's mind which is apparently what has been happening.

    The "default" (for 3.5) of this site is supposed to be the BRCS (using the sanctioned chapter 1 and 2).
    Duane Eggert

  5. #25
    Site Moderator kgauck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Springfield Mo
    Posts
    3,562
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by irdeggman View Post
    What you (and apparently others) have doen is clog up the wiki with a bunch of house-rules that are not identied as such nor are they delinieated so people like Sorontor can readily tell what system is being used - this is totally unacceptable and much more trashy then a single set of rules (any set).
    All house rules are set up on specially marked pages for that purpose. There are no house rules in general usage.

    The alternative to a trashy wiki, let's remember, is nothing. The BRCS project was abandoned, unfinished. And nothing has proceeded from it since. It is a rotting corpse. You are wasting your time attempting to get people to bow before it.

    The revised chap 2 was sanctioned (that it is was voted on with a greater majority (i.e 75 % in favor, everyone active at that time got to vote so it was as openly inclusive as it could be) and is considered "official" in that regard.
    75% of the people who didn't wander off to find something more interesting to spend their time on. This was a rump group, you were only voting among yourselves. This confers no official status and is binding in no way.

    Rejecting it so off handed is just wrong. A lot of time was spent (over 1 year) of on line discussions and mini votes along the way to develop the revised chapt 2.
    No one is rejecting it out of hand. It is rejected because it takes 40% of canon characters and fundamentally converts them by taking away their blood abilities. Because it arbitrarily took a perfectly good bloodline system and fundamentally changed the way it worked and what kind of characters it produced for no good reasons.

    Since you seem to have no reason to play along then please do not add to the confusion.
    If you suppose that the sound of crickets will attract new players to the setting, you are mistaken. The many people on the wiki who have not seen fit to use the BRCS feats, classes, or bloodline mechanic are creating new content. This is what will attract people to the setting.

    Quote Originally Posted by irdeggman View Post
    Oh and Kenneth the point of the reliance on mechanics is a reflection of how 3.5 works.
    I addressed this in post 19. Either respond to those arguments or leave the issue off the table. Don't bother attempting to raise it as a "new" issue, I'll just refer you back to earier posts.

    Now if you are creating character using 3.5 without accoutning for the mechanical strictness of the system then you are already greatly nto the house rule area.
    This makes sense if 4e strikes you as a really great game system for BR. The arguments are the same. Although 4e does a vastly better job of matching encounters, making encounters exciting, and assigning difficulty to encounters.

    The focus for Birthright really should be elsewhere. Politics and other setting considerations should drive character construction, not CR or ECL. If Gaven Tael decides he's had enough of you, he won't send his CR 4 henchmen to deal with your 4th level party, he'll send the best man he has available, and that might be a CR of any level, perhaps even the Sword Mage. The notion of precisely calibrating encounters so that they are tough enough to be exciting but not so tough that that might actually win belongs in some other setting. It might lurk about in the shadows, because at the end of the day we do need to know how tough an encounter was. What it should not do is replace the excitement inherent in an encounter because the PC's are advancing their goals and their enemies are opposing them.

    In Birthright, action, adventure, and excitement should flow from the history, politics, and domain conflicts, not from a strict mechanic about what CR this or that is. The enjoyment from the game should come from role playing, not roll playing. This setting has placed too much focus on the politics and intrigue of rival domains to just use that as window dressing for playing the kind of standard D&D that drives John Wick to make BR style games which he then calls the anti-D&D.

    I know how much you use house rules in your games and there is nothing wrong with that but in a discussion or information post it is very important to make clear where the basis is coming from and not assuming that people can read the author's mind which is apparently what has been happening.
    You are many years behind the facts (or so broad in your definition of house rules to include material published by Wizards) because since 3.5, I have found rules in wizards materials to satisfy all of my variations from the standard rules. My game now may require Player's Handbook II and Unearthed Arcana, but both come with the D&D logo and are published by Wizards.

    Further, very little of that involves character stat blocks. So none of that is really an issue.

    The "default" (for 3.5) of this site is supposed to be the BRCS (using the sanctioned chapter 1 and 2).
    Supposed to? You may wish it were true, but as the wiki reveals, the facts lay elsewhere. Of people who are currently creating content, most obviously either don't know the BRCS or choose not to use it.

    This is where we enter the "be careful what you ask for" territory.
    Because I can create character material in standard 3.5, or I can start using a totally different system, like GURPS or Houses of the Blooded. Which do you think will be more confusing?

  6. #26
    Birthright Developer irdeggman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Virginia Beach, Virginia
    Posts
    3,945
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by kgauck View Post
    Supposed to? You may wish it were true, but as the wiki reveals, the facts lay elsewhere. Of people who are currently creating content, most obviously either don't know the BRCS or choose not to use it.
    So most of the material (posted by an admittedly few number of people) are based on their personal viewpoitns of what is useful and what is not.

    I'm sorry that does not make it a valid basis for an arguement.

    And I have noticed far and away most of the new people posting have either been using 2nd ed rules (understandable) or the BRCS so you arguement on that issue is just plain wrong or skewed by a personal viewpoint.
    Duane Eggert

  7. #27
    Birthright Developer irdeggman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Virginia Beach, Virginia
    Posts
    3,945
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by kgauck View Post
    The old bloodscore, in which Arlando el-Adaba could have two blood abilities remains a critical part of the setting. Forcing conversion of all of these canon characters is a significant alteration of the setting. What argument can be offered to justify fundamentally changing how bloodline works, who will have abilities and who gets left out?

    Something like 40% of all characters in canon have bloodlines less than twenty. Important characters like Innis, Temias Coumain, Volse Redbedtehr, Anphelan Hallaravant, Antia Maricoere, Fhylie the Sword.

    Are they to be made great characters vying with dukes, or humbled, forced to give up their blood abilities because of the BRCS?

    And what justifies this? A concern with standard mechanics? Certainly this is not sufficient to so re-order the setting. A concern for balance? Why here on this point? Birthright characters have vast fortunes compared to standard D&D characters. They may command armies, or have entire domains at their disposal. But a few minor blood abilities is a crisis worth re-inventing the setting? This is roll play, indeed.

    I have seen no characters using the bloodline system therein, the feats, or classes from the BRCS, until very late.

    Let's see so defintion of power is number of blood abilities a regent has?

    Where is the logic in that one at all?

    The measure of power in BR always came from the size of the domain the regent has.

    In general the higher the bloodline strength the larger the domains.

    But this is not always true since many awnies have high strength (and scores) and yet do not rule domains.

    I'm sorry but logic dictates your basis is incorrect for determining a regent's power in a game of rulership.

    And actullly I think the real reason you haven't seen people using the BRCS system until late is a confusion as to whether the wiki should have the original character or a 3rd ed version. Since no one bothered to specify what version should be posted total lack of cohesiveness has resulted IMO.

    I do not spend hardly anytime on the wiki mostly due to a dislike of them in general but just as much due to the lack of "discussion" invovled with such a structure.
    Duane Eggert

  8. #28
    Site Moderator kgauck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Springfield Mo
    Posts
    3,562
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by irdeggman View Post
    Let's see so defintion of power is number of blood abilities a regent has?
    Identify where I said this. I content you made it up from whole cloth and attribute it me.

  9. #29
    Birthright Developer irdeggman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Virginia Beach, Virginia
    Posts
    3,945
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by kgauck View Post
    All house rules are set up on specially marked pages for that purpose. There are no house rules in general usage.
    Except for the character posting side obviously or else this sbuject would never have arisen would it>


    75% of the people who didn't wander off to find something more interesting to spend their time on. This was a rump group, you were only voting among yourselves. This confers no official status and is binding in no way.
    Interesting extrapolition of totally false premeises.

    Let's see of the group dedidcated to writing the BRCS at the time of the votes I was the only one left. So it is impossible for me to be voting by myself.

    IIRC the total in the sancitioning votes were between 30-40 people. Which is as large or larger than any poll posted on this site.

    I think the real reason that more did not vote is (just like in past US elections) they don't want to be bothered with voting. Or they were people like you who stated up front that they were going to use their own house rules for the the game they were running.


    No one is rejecting it out of hand. It is rejected because it takes 40% of canon characters and fundamentally converts them by taking away their blood abilities. Because it arbitrarily took a perfectly good bloodline system and fundamentally changed the way it worked and what kind of characters it produced for no good reasons.
    Good is in the eye of beholder.

    The existing 2nd ed bloodline system was a total reflection of the 2nd ed concept of letting the DM do what he wanted to with no structure as a basis.


    This makes sense if 4e strikes you as a really great game system for BR. The arguments are the same. Although 4e does a vastly better job of matching encounters, making encounters exciting, and assigning difficulty to encounters.
    Unfortunately 4th ed is a game primarily based on combat with no interactions system worth a darn and Rich Baker talked to someone about it and said their was not gong to be an attempt to move towards a social encounter system any more than is already present.

    So more roll playing and less role-playing. That turns off an awful lot of old school gamers (those who fell in love with the BR setting in the beginning are prime examples). If there is any doubt on that look at the suggestions for 4th ed - several people (not all, some actually want to be true to the setting)

    [quote]The focus for Birthright really should be elsewhere. Politics and other setting considerations should drive character construction, not CR or ECL. If Gaven Tael decides he's had enough of you, he won't send his CR 4 henchmen to deal with your 4th level party, he'll send the best man he has available, and that might be a CR of any level, perhaps even the Sword Mage. The notion of precisely calibrating encounters so that they are tough enough to be exciting but not so tough that that might actually win belongs in some other setting. It might lurk about in the shadows, because at the end of the day we do need to know how tough an encounter was. What it should not do is replace the excitement inherent in an encounter because the PC's are advancing their goals and their enemies are opposing them.


    In Birthright, action, adventure, and excitement should flow from the history, politics, and domain conflicts, not from a strict mechanic about what CR this or that is. The enjoyment from the game should come from role playing, not roll playing. This setting has placed too much focus on the politics and intrigue of rival domains to just use that as window dressing for playing the kind of standard D&D that drives John Wick to make BR style games which he then calls the anti-D&D.


    So politics determines how poerful and influential a regent is? Hmmm it seems that I mentioned that in the fact that the number of blood abilities should be irrelevent.

    You are many years behind the facts (or so broad in your definition of house rules to include material published by Wizards) because since 3.5, I have found rules in wizards materials to satisfy all of my variations from the standard rules. My game now may require Player's Handbook II and Unearthed Arcana, but both come with the D&D logo and are published by Wizards.
    How much of that material is OGL?

    That was one of the biggest hindrances in writing the BRCS the mandatory having to stick with OGL material and the decision to only use the core 3 books - since everyone who played 3.5 had access to them while not everyone had access to any of the others (especially those overseas).


    This is where we enter the "be careful what you ask for" territory.
    Because I can create character material in standard 3.5, or I can start using a totally different system, like GURPS or Houses of the Blooded. Which do you think will be more confusing?

    Both since neither specifies what set of rules were used and therin lies the confusion.

    That is all I've said but have quickly been the brunt of attacks of to paraphrase "what you helped write is total garbage" and yet there are numerous posts by players new to BR who came due to the BRCS-playtest. Can the wiki or you claim otherwise on that one?
    Duane Eggert

  10. #30
    Birthright Developer irdeggman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Virginia Beach, Virginia
    Posts
    3,945
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by kgauck View Post
    Identify where I said this. I content you made it up from whole cloth and attribute it me.

    From post #19

    Are they to be made great characters vying with dukes, or humbled, forced to give up their blood abilities because of the BRCS?
    There is a direct (infered) tie between the number of blood powers and the strength of rulership here - the reference to characters vying with dukes.
    Duane Eggert

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. 2nd/3rd edition
    By NaMaN in forum The Royal Library
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 06-17-2008, 08:56 AM
  2. 4th edition
    By Blastin in forum BRCS 4th Edition
    Replies: 127
    Last Post: 06-05-2008, 07:57 AM
  3. D&D 4th Edition
    By RaspK_FOG in forum The Royal Library
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 07-04-2004, 07:52 PM
  4. BR 3rd edition
    By Shade in forum The Royal Library
    Replies: 43
    Last Post: 02-05-2003, 05:43 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.