On Mon, 2002-05-27 at 07:37, brnetboard@TUARHIEVEL.ORG wrote:
> Bronto wrote:
> Thanks for all of the responses. They have been pretty helpful in roping in some of my regents. We still have some problems with the rules that I would like to hear some third party opinions on.
>
> A) My players seem to think that you deserve GB each turn for simply HAVING a sea port in a province that you control. This is based on the simplistic way the rules are written on pg. 42 of the core rule book...
>
> "To calculate the income from a seaport, divide the province rating by 2, round up, and add 1."
>
> I enterpret this to be a simplified way of dealing with a sea-based trade route from before any naval rules were published. Making matters worse, the formula for determining the income from a sea trade route differs in different parts of the rulebook.

Your interpretation is the generally accepted one.

>
> B) According to some of my players, the limit of trade routes a province can hold is for either sea or trade routes. Thus, a level 5 province could have 2 sea and 2 land-based trade routes. These rules are taken from the Book of Regency, which I haven`t had a chance to study. I plan to enforce the core book rules as a TOTAL number of trade routes regardless of type.
>
> I`m interested in hearing your take on this. I`m not sure why my players are being such lawyers this campaign, but it must be something about Birthright. Who knows.

Officially, the answer is both. That is, you get N ordinary trade routes
and N sea trade routes. The idea behind this seems to be to make
provinces with sea ports especially important and desirable. (of course
the problem is that no one thought to do that with non-sea trade routes)

************************************************** **************************
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.