The Twelve, Or Thirteen, Original Duchies

[kgauck]

----- Original Message -----

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

Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2003 10:33 AM





> Unfortunately, I never owned the supplements such as the Book

> of Priestcraft, so I`m still at a loss on this one. What are the benefits

> of naming a state religion? They must be exceptional if the landed

> regent is willing to drop a permanent point of bloodline score.



There are few, and there are tons of hassels. Naming a state religion is

nothing I would ever do willingly. Therefore the only way I can ever see a

ruler naming a state religion is because he is so in need of the help of a

large temple that he is willing to tie himself to their approval and take

the bloodline hit. Likewise, the temple could have something else that

makes the deal one that the landed ruler can`t refuse.



Kenneth Gauck

kgauck@mchsi.com

[Osprey]

For example, when you say that the Avans must descend from something other than a cadet branch of the Roele&#39;s, this arguement, I believe, defeats that line of reasoning... which is where this whole discussion started.

My question (which was meant to be a question more than an argument) was why Avan had a Great Bloodline with Great Heritage, not why his bloodline score was so high. That part is pretty easy to justify. It&#39;s far more difficult to raise the actual bloodline strength (usually requiring heroic deeds). The same goes for Great Heritage. Actually, I think your history better explains that heritage. Nonetheless, maintaining such a strong bloodline&#39;s purity would be exceedingly difficult - which is why I would suspect that nearly any bloodline would get diluted after 1500 years of intermarriage.

What I would look for to justify such a bloodline is heroic deeds and accomplishments in the more recent Avan history - at least within the last few centuries. Periodic restorations of the line seem like they would be necessary to counter the effects of long-term dilution.

-Osprey

[Fearless_Leader]

Originally posted by Osprey@Sep 30 2003, 07:34 PM
My question (which was meant to be a question more than an argument) was why Avan had a Great Bloodline with Great Heritage, not why his bloodline score was so high. That part is pretty easy to justify. It&#39;s far more difficult to raise the actual bloodline strength (usually requiring heroic deeds). The same goes for Great Heritage. Actually, I think your history better explains that heritage. Nonetheless, maintaining such a strong bloodline&#39;s purity would be exceedingly difficult - which is why I would suspect that nearly any bloodline would get diluted after 1500 years of intermarriage.

What I would look for to justify such a bloodline is heroic deeds and accomplishments in the more recent Avan history - at least within the last few centuries. Periodic restorations of the line seem like they would be necessary to counter the effects of long-term dilution.

-Osprey

Indeed it is. Somewhere in my rambling I mentioned that Avan&#39;s line probably declined, but that it was strengthened in recent generations (at least as I&#39;ve interpreted it in my games).
It should also be noted that the Bloodline Investiture and Ceremonies of Designation can also slow the degredation of a bloodline to a great degree, perhaps even stopping it entirely (which is another reason to remain of good terms with the local priest... ).

As for the bloodline strength (tainted, minor, major, great, true), I&#39;ve seen it mainly as a matter of semantics. Once one crosses a certain threshold in the bloodline score, one&#39;s bloodline becomes "great." Of course, I also don&#39;t make use of the bloodline ability score, templates, or ECLs from the BRCS.

[Osprey]

It should also be noted that the Bloodline Investiture and Ceremonies of Designation can also slow the degredation of a bloodline to a great degree, perhaps even stopping it entirely (which is another reason to remain of good terms with the local priest... ).

That&#39;s true. It brings up an interesting question, though: just how common is it for aging scions to give up their bloodlines and regency and "retire" from rulership. It&#39;s certainly the "smart" thing to do for keeping bloodlines strong, otherwise all of the bloodline gains of the regent&#39;s adult life are lost to the heir.

But we&#39;re talking about powerful regents with divine power flowing in their veins. How would you like to have lived all of your life with such power and then suddenly be bereft of it? The same goes for temporal power wielded as a regent. How many kings in medieval Europe willingly abdicated before death so that their heirs could assume the throne? I can&#39;t think of many examples, although King Lear stands as a literary example (with some historical basis).

The point is that in a feudal system, power is rarely given up voluntarily. It&#39;s just hard to let go once it&#39;s become a way of life, and this would be even more true when this involves giving up one&#39;s bloodline power as well. It takes a truly noble man to make such a sacrifice.

The Realm Spell Bloodline Ward could help in this regard, but there are numerous limitations: the duration is 1 week per caster level, and the bloodline is transferred to a focus (not directly to the heir). There are similar magic items that can preserve the bloodline for the heir, but these are probably not too common. And any of these effects only protect against violent death.

I suppose it might be more common to invest one&#39;s heir if the regent has a terminal disease and knows he&#39;s dying. But a good number must surely die without warning - heart attacks, strokes, choking, etc.

So all in all, I&#39;d guess that many regents don&#39;t manage to invest their heirs with their bloodlines. Which does give us yet another reason why the Anuirean bloodlines aren&#39;t stronger than they are.

Perhaps it is an Avan tradition to invest one&#39;s heir after a certain age (70?) and voluntarily retire - that would up the percentages significantly. On the other hand, I have a hard time imagining proud, power-driven Darien Avan giving up one ounce of power voluntarily. It seems out-of-character for him. What I can see him doing is having Rhobher Nichaleir (WIT) keeping a continuous Bloodline Ward spell on him. The focus would probably be in the temple (the priest needs either the focus or the target scion to renew the spell).

A second possibility is that the Avans have a heriditary suit of armor with the Blood Protection power. Items like this are always problematic, however, as a victorious foe will usually claim the arms of the defeated as his property. If we&#39;re following medieval codes of conduct, it was a knight&#39;s right (and usually any soldier&#39;s) to claim the arms and armor of a defeated foe - even one who surrenders or is subdued. This was the chief source of income for knights-errant and tourney "prize fighters." Likewise, battlefield looting was a powerful incentive to most poorly-paid (or conscripted) medieval soldiers.

Just some thoughts on the matter.

-Osprey

[Green Knight]

How many actually use regency loss? IMC they tend to cancel a lot of the

gains regents get from spending RPs to enhance their bloodlines. Maybe

I`m just a sadistic DM, but my player and/or NPC regents fail all the

time and their bloodlines suffer for it. In fact, if a regent doesn`t

enhance his score, he might well face a net loss over time.



Cheers

Bjørn



-----Original Message-----

From: Birthright Roleplaying Game Discussion

[mailto:BIRTHRIGHT-L@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM] On Behalf Of Fearless_Leader

Sent: 1. oktober 2003 03:14

To: BIRTHRIGHT-L@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM

Subject: Re: The Twelve, Or Thirteen, Or... [2#1974]



This post was generated by the Birthright.net message forum.

You can view the entire thread at:

http://www.birthright.net/forums/ind...=ST&f=2&t=1974



Fearless_Leader wrote:

Unfortunately, I never owned the

supplements such as the Book of Priestcraft, so I`m still at a loss on

this one. What are the benefits of naming a state religion? They must

be exceptional if the landed regent is willing to drop a permanent point

of bloodline score.



In my own campaign, raising one`s Bloodline score through rulership

(sufficient RP) is NEVER overlooked - it is the easiest way for strong

rulers to increase their bloodline score. And gains of regency from

resolving events and accomplishing great deeds (most of my adventures

have this potential) can speed that process along a great deal, as you

mentioned.

I don`t overlook it in my games either, but it often is overlooked in

discussions such as this. More specifically, I mean that it`s

overlooked when trying to explain the current state of bloodlines in

Anuire. For example, when you say that the Avans must descend from

something other than a cadet branch of the Roele`s, this arguement, I

believe, defeats that line of reasoning... which is where this whole

discussion started.



The advantage in naming a state faith, is of course, gaining the

support of said temple. The relevant passage in the BoP, pg. 70 reads

thusly: "... a state religion weakens the authority of the king to

some degree, since the king must fear the censure of the high priest. A

recognized faith weakens the king`s bloodline score by 1 point at the

time the religion is recognized (in the manner of the Matter of Justice

random event), and if the priest regent chooses to oppose any actions

taken by the king, he may apply a 2 point modifier to the king`s action

check (in favor of the priest`s preferred result). On the other hand,

recognizing a state religion may save the king face down the road."

The rules then go on to explain the benefits a priest gets for being the

state faith.

So while there are no rules benefits for the realm regent, the benefits

would primarily be in-game, scenario driven politics.



************************************************** **********************

****



Birthright-l Archives:

http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html

[Osprey]

How many actually use regency loss? IMC they tend to cancel a lot of the
gains regents get from spending RPs to enhance their bloodlines. Maybe
I`m just a sadistic DM, but my player and/or NPC regents fail all the
time and their bloodlines suffer for it. In fact, if a regent doesn`t
enhance his score, he might well face a net loss over time.

Cheers
Bjørn

I suppose that all depends on how difficult you make the challenges facing them, and how many of them they must face. The more problems a regent faces, though, the more RP they have to burn to ensure success (or at least improve the odds), and thus the slower they improve their bloodline through RP - unless they ggain regency through successful resolution of those events, in which case the RP spent is probably a net gain investment. But that all depends on how stingy you are with rewards as opposed to losses of regency.

Even a regent who succeeds 75% of the time and fails 25% of the time is likely to break even on gains and losses of regency, as the losses are much more severe than the gains.

-Osprey

[ConjurerDragon]

Bjørn Eian Sørgjerd schrieb:



>How many actually use regency loss? IMC they tend to cancel a lot of the

>gains regents get from spending RPs to enhance their bloodlines. Maybe

>I`m just a sadistic DM, but my player and/or NPC regents fail all the

>time and their bloodlines suffer for it. In fact, if a regent doesn`t

>enhance his score, he might well face a net loss over time.

>Cheers

>Bjørn

>

>

Which is illogical if only applied to RP loss - when failure in certain

actions can lead to a loss of RP, then success in the same actions

should lead to a gain in RP. For example losing half of your kingdom to

a catastrophic event would result in a major loss of RP - but gaining

the same amount of holdings currently does not increase the RP in the

same way, does it? If it would it would beginning heirs give a boost of

RP to work with when they first are invested as new ruler.

bye

Michael

(and I do not post that because I play in Björns campaign and my PC is

very old - not only at least ;-))

[ryancaveney]

On Thu, 2 Oct 2003, Michael Romes wrote:



> Which is illogical if only applied to RP loss - when failure in

> certain actions can lead to a loss of RP, then success in the same

> actions should lead to a gain in RP.



Agreed.



> For example losing half of your kingdom to a catastrophic event would

> result in a major loss of RP - but gaining the same amount of holdings

> currently does not increase the RP in the same way, does it?



I play that it does. Similarly, in any case where there is an exchange in

which one party loses bloodline score (e.g., in/di-vestiture of multiple

holdings), the other party gains the same amount.





Ryan Caveney

[Green Knight]

Well, that all depends on how you view RPs gained from your domain. I tend to think of RPs as "you`re doing well points". That is, the more RPs you gain the better you are doing governing your domain (and remember that regency loss not only takes away points from your score, but also depletes your RPs).



With he RPs you gain, you can both solve the various challenges that arise for your domain. Sometimes things go well enough that there is a surplus, which can be used to enhance your bloodline. Sometime things go wrong, and you loose your precious bloodline points as well as your stash of RPs. Over the years, if you rule really well, you`ll have a net gain, but most rulers will find their bloodline scores pretty stable.



In addition, when the heir takes over, I generally think he should be required to spend some regency to take over a domain (and unless someone, like the old regent, has some RPs to spend I think that should lead to a loss of bloodline score).



Indeed, the first part of a new regents rule migth well break him, or at the very least reduce his bloodline score by a few points. The first few years (especially if there are many enemies or the domain is unstable) might have many difficult cahallenges to the new regent`s rule.



In sum, I find that this effectively removes the tendency for bloodline scores to increase to unrealistic levels over too short a period of time.



Cheers

Bjørn



...and we all feel with Michael, Assan is getting very old, and these are dangerous times...



>

> Fra: Michael Romes <Archmage@T-ONLINE.DE>

> Dato: 2003/10/02 Thu PM 04:41:21 CEST

> Til: BIRTHRIGHT-L@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM

> Emne: Re: The Twelve, Or Thirteen, Or... [2#1974]

>

> Bjørn Eian Sørgjerd schrieb:

>

> >How many actually use regency loss? IMC they tend to cancel a lot of the

> >gains regents get from spending RPs to enhance their bloodlines. Maybe

> >I`m just a sadistic DM, but my player and/or NPC regents fail all the

> >time and their bloodlines suffer for it. In fact, if a regent doesn`t

> >enhance his score, he might well face a net loss over time.

> >Cheers

> >Bjørn

> >

> >

> Which is illogical if only applied to RP loss - when failure in certain

> actions can lead to a loss of RP, then success in the same actions

> should lead to a gain in RP. For example losing half of your kingdom to

> a catastrophic event would result in a major loss of RP - but gaining

> the same amount of holdings currently does not increase the RP in the

> same way, does it? If it would it would beginning heirs give a boost of

> RP to work with when they first are invested as new ruler.

> bye

> Michael

> (and I do not post that because I play in Björns campaign and my PC is

> very old - not only at least ;-))

>

>

>

>

>

>

>



Cheers

Bjørn



-------------------------------------------------

WebMail fra Tele2 http://www.tele2.no

-------------------------------------------------

[Osprey]

In addition, when the heir takes over, I generally think he should be required to spend some regency to take over a domain (and unless someone, like the old regent, has some RPs to spend I think that should lead to a loss of bloodline score).

I think that should depend on how smooth the succession goes. By the current BRCS rules, the heir gains the former regent&#39;s RP reserve and earns half collection from the realm until a coronation ceremony is successfully completed. If there are any regents with holdings in the realm, they may spend RP to support or oppose the coronation. So if there are other contenders, they could make it VERY difficult (and expensive, in terms of RP) for the Ceremony to succeed without strong support from allies.

On the other hand, suceeding to a realm where the former regent&#39;s allies all support the heir will make for a relatively smooth transition with low RP cost - which I think is as it should be. It means the former regent (or the heir himself) made certain of the other regents&#39; support for the heir - the sign of a strong ruler leaving a stable legacy behind.

Of course, in the current climate of competitive politics, such unilateral support is unlikely...