Results 1 to 10 of 10
  1. #1
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Columbus, Nebraska, USA
    Posts
    3
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Hi all.

    I am searching for any writtings on how to play with dwarven holdings.

    Looking for anyone that has worked up a playable idea on how their underground facilities are affected/un-affected by surface wars.

    After all, if they are attacked, shouldn't they have the right to move into their mountain fortresses and shut the gates, effectively sealing themselvs away from the outside world?

    Welcome to any and all comments on this subject.

  2. #2
    Site Moderator kgauck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Springfield Mo
    Posts
    3,562
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    I ran a campaign in Baruk-Azhik, but I dealt with many of the these aspects
    by describing them as differences in perception, not reality. The dwarves
    can`t lock themselves away forever. All life ultimatly derives from Avani`s
    warmth, so the dwarves need to get to the surface to farm and herd most of
    the time. The dwarves are very diligent and preparedness-minded, so I can
    imagine a two year supply of food and materials suplimented by geo-thermal
    agriculture, raids of their own herds and farms, and even eating rocks
    (vitamins and minerals, yes, calories, no). So dwarves can last much longer
    inside their undergound fortresses much longer than a besieging army can
    just loiter about in mountains. While I might declare this time period to
    be 2 years +, no one has ever actually been able to lay down a siege and
    wait the dwarves out, so as far as the humans are concerned, it may as well
    be a thousand years.

    You can knock, but that doesn`t mean the dwarves will answer. They may be
    farming and herding until their scouts alert them to arrivals in the passes
    and bridges. Then, if they don`t want to meet you, your arrival finds only
    deserted fields and quiet hills and valleys. You might suppose that because
    they didn`t greet visitors for a hundred years, they have been locked in
    their fortresses for a hundred years. That`s not how it actually happens.

    The dwarves are to the mountains what the elves are to the forest. They are
    at home and in their element. You aren`t. They can move quickly in rough,
    moving their full movement when you are moving at half yours, or at 3/4
    normal dwarven movement when you are moving at 1/4 yours. They arrange
    excellent ambushes in key passes, on steep passages, from hieghts, and using
    other obstacles. They always attack from above (higher elevation) and use
    their crossbows to excellent effect. By means a of tunnel network, they can
    put raiding parties on the surface to cut you off from your supply trains
    and reinforcements, leaving you alone in the mountains. If pursued, the
    dwarves just retreat uphill. How far can you run uphill? They will run up
    in stages under the cross bow (or sling) cover of the others. Will you run
    uphill while dwarven missiles hail down?

    If dwarves remain in the mountains and those hills near to mountains, they
    can remain unaffected by the wars and disturbances of others by keeping
    sentries and making use of their fortresses. But when not requried, they
    return to the surface to harvest their crops and tend their animals. Their
    crops are root crops and tubers for the most part. Such crops share the
    dwarven affection for dwelling under ground, and are harder to disturb. A
    potato field or carrot patch can`t be destroyed nearly as easily as a field
    of grain. In the mean time, who`s watching your supplies?

    The dwarves build for the long term. This means they build in stone, not
    wood. Wood is a useful material, but you don`t build in it. Buildings may
    exist at the surface level, but where humans build *on* the surface, dwarves
    build just under it. They will excavate the area for a house, build a stone
    house in the pit, then put the dirt on top of the house. Dirt might be used
    for terracing fields as well. The only way in is throught the door, which
    might be impenetrable iron doors, or secret stonework doors in an otherwise
    unassuming rock face. Family compounds are linked by secret tunnels, though
    each house is normally defended by the family whose favored class is
    Fighter.

    The effects described in the books are more or less valid on the realm
    level, although as far as I am concerned, the way the dwarves achieve these
    ends are not as the humans take them to be.

    Kenneth Gauck
    kgauck@mchsi.com

    ************************************************** **************************
    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.

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    144
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    I believe that dwarves can in fact stay forever sealed. Kheleb Izhil in the Khinasi is sealed, however it is also defenseless. Let me explain.

    If the dwarves seal themselves inside their mountain fortress then the sieger can simply settle on the surface nothing would stop him since the dwarves are inside and there is no enemy outside.

    Another thing that you must consider is that unlike a normal siege, the dwarves are totally unable to trade. In a normal siege, the guildhall of the town is not inside the castle, but in this case, it is.

    Erm, I don't know what else to add.

    White Hand :P

  4. #4
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Columbus, Nebraska, USA
    Posts
    3
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Another thing that you must consider is that unlike a normal siege, the dwarves are totally unable to trade. In a normal siege, the guildhall of the town is not inside the castle, but in this case, it is.
    Well, in the Baruk-Azhik Players Secrets it describes them as having many underground roads in the realm, even some leading to other realms, giving them the ability to trade within their underground provinces.
    As BA has two distinct land types (mountains, hills), in game terms this gives them the ability to trade between those provinces. Correct? (thanks WH)
    ----------
    Kenneth...
    That is as near perfect a description of comprehending the dwarven mindset as I have ever read. Brings back to mind the way Dennis McKiernan and Tolkien wrote about dwarves. Fantastic background to use, thank you.

    What I need though, is samples of how to actually manage this underground effects upon the dwarven nations in a birthright campaign.
    It is very likely we will have a major assault on a dwarven realm in our campaign game, and us DMs are at odds on how to do this.

  5. #5
    Site Moderator geeman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    2,178
    Downloads
    4
    Uploads
    7
    At 05:46 PM 6/16/2002 +0200, Gryffon Towser wrote:

    >What I need though, is samples of how to actually manage this underground
    >effects upon the dwarven nations in a birthright campaign.
    >It is very likely we will have a major assault on a dwarven realm in our
    >campaign game, and us DMs are at odds on how to do this.

    Here are some suggestions:

    1. You could consider all dwarven provinces and holdings automatically
    fortified up to their population level automatically to reflect the
    difficulty of attempting to deal with a population that exists mainly
    underground.

    2. Give dwarven provinces free dwarven units and/or having them raise such
    units as "levies."

    3. In most cases the battles inside dwarven provinces should give the
    advantages of terrain to the dwarven commander as well. If you use the
    ::shudder:: warcards you might want to allow the defending dwarven
    commander more "mountain" terrain cards to be placed on the battle map at
    his discretion.

    4. Accurate intelligence information might also be difficult to collect not
    only given the physical nature of dwarven dwellings, but the insular nature
    of their culture, so you could increase the difficulty of performing
    espionage actions having to do with gathering information about the numbers
    and types of units that exist in dwarven provinces.

    5. Personally, I use several additional abilities that regents can train
    their companies of soldiers, one of which is "mountaineering" which
    basically allows a unit of soldiers that occupies a province with
    mountainous terrain to operate away from their home provinces without
    paying additional maintenance costs and also allows them to appear anywhere
    on the map during a battle to attack with "surprise" (one free battle round
    of attack.) Dwarven units could all automatically have this training or
    get it very cheaply. I`ve ruled that they must appear in appropriate
    terrain, but since I use a much larger grid for large scale combat, there
    is no restriction on the types and amounts of terrain possible, so you`d
    probably need to go with the multiple mountainous terrain option in order
    for this to really be much of an advantage.

    6. You could assume a dwarven commander automatically has the Strategy
    proficiency--or whatever 3e equivalent you use--when defending dwarven
    provinces or, if he already has that proficiency, assume he has it "twice"
    in comparison to a non-dwarven commander who could not possibly be as
    familiar with the terrain.

    7. The effects of a whole unit using moraskorr weapons is kind of
    debatable, but you might consider giving a unit or three of the dwarven
    units a superior melee value to reflect them being so armed. Elite units
    with other superior stats are also perfectly plausible.

    8. You might also want to consider the issue of magic and realm
    spells. Dwarves are not allowed access to the wizard class in 2e, of
    course, and one could certainly maintain that restriction in 3e. But thing
    about giving them access to a human ally and/or some sort of exceptional
    dwarven character who has arcane or other mystical powers like the ghostly
    Grimm Graybeard in the Baruk Azhik sourcebook.

    9. All of those things made easier for dwarves in rugged, mountainous
    terrain could be made more difficult for non-dwarven units in such terrain,
    so you could give the opposite effects to most of the things listed above
    to non-dwarves who invade. Their movement rates, of course, are affected
    by terrain, but units of cavalry may not be able to charge, the range of
    missile attacks might be limited, the engineers less effective, the
    maintenance costs for keeping non-dwarf units abroad might be
    higher. Things like that.

    Hope that helps,
    Gary

    ************************************************** **************************
    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.

  6. #6
    Site Moderator kgauck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Springfield Mo
    Posts
    3,562
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    1) you can`t pillage dwarven holdings unless you gain access to the
    fortress. May be you could, with great effort reduce a province a single
    level - representing some outlying infrastructure - but that`s about it.
    2) A siege doesn`t reduce the defensibility of dwarven defences, unless a
    race of miners (other dwarves, orogs, &c) conducts a major part of the
    siege.
    3) There are no rules for logistics in BR, and in most provinces its
    possible to imagine even a dozen units subsisting for quite a while without
    too great an effort. Of course some places, like the Giantdowns, dwarven
    mountains, and some of the worst Khinasi deserts can`t support armies. 95%
    of all food needs to be dragged up into the mountains by the besieging army.
    Doubling or trippling unit maintenence costs would be one way to represent
    this.
    4) The favored class for dwarves is Fighter, so commoners and experts can
    easily afford to multi-class as fighters or warriors (assuming the favored
    class permits both). That makes for a tough militia. The warcards unit
    "Khurin-Azur Miners" is probabaly a fair representation of dwarven
    militia/levy.
    5) Dwarves will take and hold high ground, in war card terms that`s a +1 to
    all combat ratings.
    6) Dwarves probabaly produce field fortifications made of wood very quickly.
    Ditches, wooden palisades, the kind of "giant caltrops" that prevent cavalry
    charges, other kinds of cover producing-movement impeeding constructs should
    be a routine part of dwarven battles on the defensive.
    7) Given the dwarven skill at building battlefield enhancements, their slow
    speed in march (especially away from rough terrain), and their personalities
    all suggest that dwarves prefer to fight battles on the tactical defensive.
    They dig in, fight and cause highly favorable casualty ratios. If
    neccesary, they fall back into hills, rough, or even mountainside terrain.
    8) Dwarves are famous for two kinds of multi-class options fighter/rogue and
    fighter/cleric. Fighter/rogues are tough scouts. Capable of sneaking up
    and setting up potent ambushes. Fighter/clerics not only provide healing,
    but also morale enhancing spells. A battle magic version of Remove Fear
    would eliminate Fallback results and increase the already high morale of
    dwarven troops by one (and that generally means a morale of 4!)
    9) By combining field fortifications, high morale, and high defensive
    ratings, a very small number of dwarves could be very hard to push out of a
    possition. On the contrary, non-dwarves would begin to suffer morale
    effects from being ambushed, harassed by archers in the mountains shooting
    down, high casualty ratios, and the inability to do any real harm to the
    dwarves. At least against humans you get to pillage a town every once and a
    while. Enemy troops might lose a morale rating after a certain number of
    encounters, as long as the enemy troops remain in mountain terrain. Dwarves
    might really be attacking enemy morale as much as they are attacking the
    physical strength of the enemy.

    Kenneth Gauck
    kgauck@mchsi.com

    ************************************************** **************************
    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.

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    883
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    The best solution I see is to consider ALL dwarven holdings in dwarven
    lands to be fortified.
    bye
    Michael
    *************************

    brnetboard@TUARHIEVEL.ORG wrote:

    >A_dark wrote:
    > I believe that dwarves can in fact stay forever sealed. Kheleb Izhil in the Khinasi is sealed, however it is also defenseless. Let me explain.
    >
    >If the dwarves seal themselves inside their mountain fortress then the sieger can simply settle on the surface nothing would stop him since the dwarves are inside and there is no enemy outside.
    >
    >Another thing that you must consider is that unlike a normal siege, the dwarves are totally unable to trade. In a normal siege, the guildhall of the town is not inside the castle, but in this case, it is.
    >
    >Erm, I don`t know what else to add.
    >
    >White Hand :P
    >
    >************************************************* ***************************
    >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.
    >

    ************************************************** **************************
    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.

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Belgrade, Serbia
    Posts
    152
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    > 1. You could consider all dwarven provinces and holdings
    > automatically fortified up to their population level
    > automatically to reflect the difficulty of attempting to deal
    > with a population that exists mainly underground.

    I would consider Dwarves fortified against outside assaults, but when
    being attacked by Orogs or other Dwarves, they would have to build
    underground fortifications or fight without adventage. I would also
    apply similar rule to Elves fighting in the forest.

    I think that level 10 for every province wouldn`t be too much for the
    Dwarves. I don`t think that it should depend on province level because
    bonus comes from natural caverns, not the province level.

    >
    > 2. Give dwarven provinces free dwarven units and/or having
    > them raise such units as "levies."

    Of course.

    > 8. You might also want to consider the issue of magic and
    > realm spells. Dwarves are not allowed access to the wizard
    > class in 2e, of course, and one could certainly maintain that
    > restriction in 3e. But thing about giving them access to a
    > human ally and/or some sort of exceptional dwarven character
    > who has arcane or other mystical powers like the ghostly
    > Grimm Graybeard in the Baruk Azhik sourcebook.

    We(Khurin Azur) had help of human wizard in Warlords of Winter PBeM.
    Didn`t help us much against Urga-Zai.

    ************************************************** **************************
    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.

  9. #9
    Site Moderator geeman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    2,178
    Downloads
    4
    Uploads
    7
    At 03:02 AM 6/17/2002 +0200, Milos Rasic wrote:

    > > 1. You could consider all dwarven provinces and holdings
    > > automatically fortified up to their population level
    > > automatically to reflect the difficulty of attempting to deal
    > > with a population that exists mainly underground.
    >
    >I would consider Dwarves fortified against outside assaults, but when
    >being attacked by Orogs or other Dwarves, they would have to build
    >underground fortifications or fight without adventage. I would also
    >apply similar rule to Elves fighting in the forest.

    I don`t know. We`re still talking about tunnels and underground dwellings
    here, and though orogs and other dwarves would be better at the sapping and
    engineering techniques required to assault such fortification it`s not like
    they can pass through the stone. I think this might be better reflected by
    giving orog and dwarven engineers a bit of a bonus when attacking
    underground units, but I wouldn`t erase the fortification entirely.

    > > 8. You might also want to consider the issue of magic and
    > > realm spells. Dwarves are not allowed access to the wizard
    > > class in 2e, of course, and one could certainly maintain that
    > > restriction in 3e. But thing about giving them access to a
    > > human ally and/or some sort of exceptional dwarven character
    > > who has arcane or other mystical powers like the ghostly
    > > Grimm Graybeard in the Baruk Azhik sourcebook.
    >
    >We(Khurin Azur) had help of human wizard in Warlords of Winter PBeM.
    >Didn`t help us much against Urga-Zai.

    No? Well, YMMV, I guess. The inability of dwarves to become wizards does
    place a pretty serious limitation on them at the domain level, especially
    since mountainous provinces tend to have high source levels
    available. Personally, I think it`s arguable whether dwarves should be
    able to rule up their population levels without damaging their potential
    sources like elves, and their priests might be able to use sources to power
    their realm spells in the same way druids/priests of Erik _should_ be able
    to do.

    Gary

    ************************************************** **************************
    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.

  10. #10
    Site Moderator kgauck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Springfield Mo
    Posts
    3,562
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Gary" <geeman@SOFTHOME.NET>
    Sent: Monday, June 17, 2002 2:54 PM


    > I don`t know. We`re still talking about tunnels and underground dwellings
    > here, and though orogs and other dwarves would be better at the sapping
    > and engineering techniques required to assault such fortification it`s not
    > like they can pass through the stone. I think this might be better
    > reflected by giving orog and dwarven engineers a bit of a bonus when
    > attacking underground units, but I wouldn`t erase the fortification
    > entirely.

    Normally, all you need to do to take a fortified province is to hang out
    with as many units as the fortification rating of the province. Dwarves
    have two advantages which will tend to negate this. One is that their
    fortifications are hard to attack. Where its possible for archers to
    support siege operations, and even horse units can act to forage widely,
    defend siege equipment, &c, when the fortifications are underground, archers
    cannot support attacks, and other kinds of troops are just as useless
    (except as labor gangs). Only the siege units matter, and excavation must
    preceed their use. Second, a significant part of the siege is the starving
    of the occupants. Since the dwarves tend to have huge stores, and can at
    least supliment their diet with subterrarian food sources, its analogous to
    besieging a port city which retains control of the sea.

    As a result, I might not just total all units, but count siege units fully
    and count other units as half. Secondly, I might add a 4 week period before
    the siege even begins during which excavation must occur.

    > Personally, I think it`s arguable whether dwarves should be
    > able to rule up their population levels without damaging their potential
    > sources like elves, and their priests might be able to use sources to
    > power their realm spells in the same way druids/priests of Erik
    > _should_ be able to do.

    I would think that dwarven development does reduce sources the same way that
    human development does. The dwarves are more master-the-earth types than
    live-in-harmony-with-the-earth types. I do see how, dwarves might be able
    to use sources the same way druids might. But I would limit the possible
    spells drawn to those with a special connection to the land, not just as a
    extra source of power.

    Kenneth Gauck
    kgauck@mchsi.com

    ************************************************** **************************
    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.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

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.