Is there anything to BR besides a 3E conversion?

[Kyrion]

And here`s my Taeghas page:



http://www.gamersnook.com/br/



I made one or two gaffes on province descriptions (directions switched,

that sort of thing), but I gave it some serious effort.



At 04:15 PM 9/16/2003 -0500, you wrote:

>Kenneth wrote:

> > Discuss the BRCS all you want, but lets talk about something else too.

>Lets discuss the Atlas in the open (unlike the updated BR rules) because

>every DM has detailed at least a half dozen realms to some extent. We could

>all send submissions to a cave and get back an Atlas in six months, or we

>could discuss our creations here. What we send off might be long, detailed

>documents, but surely we can post summaries and essential points here. It

>may very well be that ideas discussed here will improve the longer document

>submitted for an Atlas.

>

>

>Here is a webpage I started for Mhoried in a PbeM game - it is too long to

>post here but comments are welcome. Bits that you find interesting can be

>posted/pasted for discussion.

>

>http://www.mabinogin.com/NightofFire/Mhorsheet.htm

>

>Randy ~ Eosin

>

>

>

>

>

>

>---

>[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus Scanner]

[Prospero]

Originally posted by kgauck@Sep 16 2003, 07:09 PM
----- Original Message -----

From: "irdeggman" <brnetboard@BIRTHRIGHT.NET>

Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2003 4:57 AM





> So the bottom line is that you don`t think that people should be

> discussing the topics that are of the most interest to them.



Huh?&#33;? Quite a leap there. My complaint is that there is nothing else

going on (or that it seems to be no more than 5%) here. There is a

difference. Discuss it all you want. But, I am quite sure that there are

other things too talk about too. This is what I mean by "crowding".



Discuss the BRCS all you want, but lets talk about something else too.

I believe irdeggman&#39;s gist here was that people are talking about what they want to talk about. Now, your interests may lie in a different direction, which is fine . . . but don&#39;t try to make everyone just talk about what you want to talk about.

If you want to talk about Aduria, Djapar, the Gorgon&#39;s mother, or whatever, then do it, and see if anyone wants to join you. If someone else starts an interesting discussion, join them. Don&#39;t just say, "You guys are talking about things I am not interested in, so stop. Talk about what I want to talk about."

[kgauck]

Eosin the Red wrote:



> Here is a webpage I started for Mhoried in a PbeM game -

>

> http://www.mabinogin.com/NightofFire/Mhorsheet.htm



And Scott M. Baron wrote:





> And here`s my Taeghas page:

>

> http://www.gamersnook.com/br/



Both of which are pretty neat and very nicely done. Both are just beyond

the area`s I have developed in my own campaign, so I may borrow some ideas

if events take me a little south.



In Eosin`s Mhoried page, I particularly liked the rules page for what it

said about the people living there. A few Wheel of Time classes, I`ll need

to check up on, but I keep hearing that WoT is a setting very useflu for BR,

so I need to pick it up. I was interested by the various regional feats

within Mhoried itself, but it all looks very well thought out. I was

impressed by the motivation of the Mhor himself, he was desperately in need

of some further explanation. I hope the province pages are still to be

developed, they look promising.



Scott`s page includes more than just the Taeghas PS, but that is certainly

the meat and potatoes of the page. Both include maps of interesting

features, but I was struck by the placement of temples of Neserie. I

generally think of them as being in town, where the fishermen - and

cemetaries- are. What led you to the interpreation of the sea godess as a

nature figure? The county by county description is very nice, but I was

especially intrigued by the "places of note".



Overall, I think I will have to write a PS of Stjordvik and Talinie once my

campaign is wrapped up (the light at the end of the tunnel is visible). It

will be interesting to undertake such a project post-campaign, rather than

prior. My own site is

http://home.mchsi.com/~kgauck/taelshore/ and I took a character based

approach, describing the realm through its leaders, rather than a

geographical approach. My site is not a well laid out as either Scott`s or

Eosin`s. I expect most people have seen it, but here it is if you have not.



Kenneth Gauck

kgauck@mchsi.com

[kgauck]

As one might expect there are plenty of posters who would rather leave well

enought alone. Prospero being only the most recent. I rather think its in

the interests of the whole community if we are occasionally encouraged to

pull back from our obsession on mechanics from time to time. Never have I

advocated ending or reducing the discussion of the BRCS (I participate too

much in it), I have only urged that we do more as well. Appologies to those

who have read some variation of this reply thrice.



Kenneth Gauck

kgauck@mchsi.com

[Raesene Andu]

Originally posted by kgauck@Sep 17 2003, 04:39 AM
Discuss the BRCS all you want, but lets talk about something else too. Lets discuss the Atlas in the open (unlike the updated BR rules) because every DM has detailed at least a half dozen realms to some extent. We could all send submissions to a cave and get back an Atlas in six months, or we could discuss our creations here. What we send off might be long, detailed documents, but surely we can post summaries and essential points here. It may very well be that ideas discussed here will improve the longer document submitted for an Atlas. References to length are based on the fact that I don`t know whether the new Atlas will look more like the various regional books or like a compendium of PS`.

I&#39;m not opposed to open discussion about the Atlas. In fact, I&#39;d encourage it. As you might have noticed, I&#39;ve been posting info on how people can help out, by writing material to fill in sections of the Atlas that still have to be done.

In answer to your last question, I can give you a brief rundown on size and page numbers. The realms are going to be roughly 4-8 pages long each (the major realms get longer descriptions) and the organisations (temples, guilds, wizards, etc) will be roughly 1/4-1 page in size, although a couple of the major ones are a little longer. After that there is a section on history, an one the culture of each region/race. No estimate on the sizes of those sections, and then some additional rules material (including prestige classes).

Note: Pages are formatted in 9pt font with two columns.

Just to let you know, the following Anuirean realms don&#39;t have anyone currently working on them Dhoesone, Elinie, Tuornen, Medoere, Taeghas, Coeranys, and Broesengae, although I have had an expression of interest in Coeranys. The rest either have a completed draft or are being worked on. If anyone outthere has done a lot of work on one of these realms and wants to include it in the Atlas, let me know at dmdarkstar@yahoo.com and we can discuss it.

Also, if there is anything you would like to see included in the Atlas, let me know (either here or by e-mail) and I will consider your proposal.

[Peter Lubke]

On Tue, 2003-09-16 at 17:45, Kenneth Gauck wrote:

> ----- Original Message -----

> From: "Fearless_Leader" <brnetboard@BIRTHRIGHT.NET>

> Sent: Monday, September 15, 2003 10:24 PM

>

> > Maybe you aren`t alone, but don`t pretend to speak for the rest of us.

>

> Didn`t do that. Claimed I represented at most a dozen people (mostly

> because its a nice round number).

>

> > With the release of the BRCS and its subsequent discussions, I`ve seen

> > more people than ever before register with the forums... the BR

> > community has literally expanded by a factor of 10. When the

> > community was only contained to a few hardcore players on the mailing

> > list, there were less than 300 people, now there are thousands.... I see

> > this only as a good thing. The fine tuning of the rules will only produce

> a

> > better product that will attract more players.



If the thousands were all posting, you MIGHT have had a point. However,

I think you make KGauck`s for him instead.



"Better" product? - let`s give it the benefit of the doubt and call it a

*new* product, and in the tradition of gold old American marketing of

course *new* means *improved* (regardless of facts).



However, to each his own. If 3e appeals to some then let them play, but

those that wish to play BR without 3e have been crowded out. Personally,

and I do know many that agree with me, 3e sucks - but I also recognize

that there are those who like it and their opinion is equally valid.



>

> I think the way we count members has changed. Lists only count people who

> subscribe to get mail. Web sites that require regestration for some

> purposes will tend to accumulate registrations that lapse. I don`t believe

> that the community has grown. I rather suspect its shrinking. I was

> willing to believe that a comprehensive CS would attract players a year ago.

> I no longer believe that, and to see its discussion so dominate the forums,

> crowding out anything else, seems counter productive.

>



A comprehensive CS was ALWAYS going to lose some, especially those who

were essentially satisfied to start with.



OTOH, joining the mainstream 3e band was going to expose BR to a greater

audience - but also an audience with greater choices who are therefore

more likely to be less adhesive in their loyalties. This itself leads to

a revolving door of new ideas.





> Kenneth Gauck

> kgauck@mchsi.com

[irdeggman]

Originally posted by kgauck@Sep 16 2003, 02:09 PM
> So the bottom line is that you don`t think that people should be

> discussing the topics that are of the most interest to them.



Huh?&#33;? Quite a leap there. My complaint is that there is nothing else

going on (or that it seems to be no more than 5%) here. There is a

difference. Discuss it all you want. But, I am quite sure that there are

other things too talk about too. This is what I mean by "crowding".



Kenneth Gauck

kgauck@mchsi.com

Oops, you are absolutely right Kenneth. I apologize for the "edgy" comment. All you were doing was stating an opinion on how wish there was somethings that interested you to discuss.