Nobles and the Law

[irdeggman]

Kenneth,

I can't disagree with "viewpoints".

And some of that can be used to explain "how things may work behind the scenes".

But the question asked was (and it was interpreted (at least by me) as being a rules-based question and not a philoshical one) - especially when looking at the connection to Ariya:

I still don't know if the Thane of Talinie and the NIT are two separate domains or one? I read it as one domain. If two, then who runs NIT?

And do you roll random events for each or just one?

Another example of this situation, I think, is the Prince-paladin of Ariya?

Now it really doesn't matter how it happened but at the moment both the NIT and the province are ruled by the same person - hence the same domain.

Domain is a way of measuring "personal power". How one handles one aspect has a direct relationship with the others. Regents are associated with all they hold and rule.

Almost all of Cerilia is fraught with strife and conflicts (hence the one of the basic constructs of the game - and directly linked to the title of the Anuire sourcebook "Ruins of Empire".

The comparison to the paladin-prince of Ariya is a great example. So is the paladin ruler of Elinie. Every paladin ruler would be torn between duty to the state and duty to their deity. Why does this need to be reflected via different "domains"? It makes no sense mechanically or even common sense-wise to split things up so. It will only serve to make the domain level of play that more complex (mechanically) when it is already a difficult thing to handle overall.

IMO - rolling more than one random event for a single regent is just plain harsh. This would keep the player constantly dealing with them, regardless of domain size or structure.

[ConjurerDragon]

irdeggman schrieb:
> This post was generated by the Birthright.net message forum.
> You can view the entire thread at:
> http://www.birthright.net/forums/showthread.php?goto=newpost&t=4073
> irdeggman wrote:
> Kenneth,
>
> I can`t disagree with "viewpoints".
>
> And some of that can be used to explain "how things may work behind the scenes".
>
> But the question asked was (and it was interpreted (at least by me) as being a rules-based question and not a philoshical one) - especially when looking at the connection to Ariya:
>
>
>
> ------------ QUOTE ----------
> I still don`t know if the Thane of Talinie and the NIT are two separate domains or one? I read it as one domain. If two, then who runs NIT?
>
> And do you roll random events for each or just one?
>
> Another example of this situation, I think, is the Prince-paladin of Ariya?
> -----------------------------
>
>
>
> Now it really doesn`t matter how it happened but at the moment both the NIT and the province are ruled by the same person - hence the same domain.
>
> Domain is a way of measuring "personal power". How one handles one aspect has a direct relationship with the others. Regents are associated with all they hold and rule.
>
> Almost all of Cerilia is fraught with strife and conflicts (hence the one of the basic constructs of the game - and directly linked to the title of the Anuire sourcebook "Ruins of Empire".
>
> The comparison to the paladin-prince of Ariya is a great example. So is the paladin ruler of Elinie. Every paladin ruler would be torn between duty to the state and duty to their deity. Why does this need to be reflected via different "domains"? It makes no sense mechanically or even common sense-wise to split things up so. It will only serve to make the domain level of play that more complex (mechanically) when it is already a difficult thing to handle overall.
>
> IMO - rolling more than one random event for a single regent is just plain harsh. This would keep the player constantly dealing with them, regardless of domain size or structure.
>
Or it would emphasize that no single ruler can rule a huge realm
consisting of different holding types alone without huge and numerous
problems.

That is one of the answers to the question why the Gorgon has not taken
over all of Anuire already. Speaking in 2E terms even he is limited to 3
actions and the random events of all of Anuire under his direct rule
would be impossible to deal with.

It also emphasizes the value of vassals who have actions of their own to
take care for local random events.

[stv2brown1988]

IMO - rolling more than one random event for a single regent is just plain harsh. This would keep the player constantly dealing with them, regardless of domain size or structure.

Thanks for answering my question.

To play out the differences between the two sides of the domain, NIT and Talinie, I guess I should mix up the random events that are rolled. One domain turn the random event affects NIT, the next Talnine holdings. What do you guys think?

Maybe after a Great Captain random event, I could roll twice for random events, one for each side, as a way to spice up the division between the two. I mean look what's going on with the government of Belgium in RL right now.

Steve

[Sinister]

well there's also the matter of how you keep players engaged. I do domain turns "between adventures" allowing the players to come to me with their turn so it's not taking up someone's game time.

2 random events that are being role-played out (granted I know most people just roll it and not role it) would take awhile.

I like the idea of alternating the problems or presenting the player with envelope A or B for their random event. Then just resolve one.

[geeman]

At 10:14 AM 12/4/2007, irdeggman wrote:

>IMO - rolling more than one random event for a single regent is just
>plain harsh. This would keep the player constantly dealing with
>them, regardless of domain size or structure.

Hence the need for a regent to at some point start breaking up his
domain amongst Vassals, each of whom have then their own set of
random events to deal with. That and the fact that a Regent isn`t
going to collect RP after the size of his domain levels equal his
bloodline score....

In any case, the number of random events really should be based on
the size of domain features, but the rules assume that domains are
going to be of middling size and do not address this issue. After
all, Darian Avan should have more events within his realm to address
than a regent who controls only a few guild holding levels, right?

Ideally, random events really should exist in their own little
subset, arising from population and source potential levels and
affecting ALL regents who control domains within an affected
area. After all, events don`t occur in isolation, and they don`t
only occur as often in one place as another. it`s hard to imagine a
regent who controls temple holdings being that directly bothered by a
"Trade Matter" random event, while a "Blood Challenge" is going to
probably only directly affect one regent, but any regent whose realm
occurs in or around a "Festival" or "Natural Event" might need to pay
attention to that situation.

Gary

[kgauck]

Some of that can be used to explain "how things may work behind the scenes".

I'm afraid its the mechanics that happen behind the scenes, the roleplaying is foreground.

But the question asked was (and it was interpreted (at least by me) as being a rules-based question and not a philoshical one) - especially when looking at the connection to Ariya.

Maybe it was, but as ConjurerDragon points out, the more realms you control, the more stable things become, which is backwards. Bigger realms have more going on, not less.

Now it really doesn't matter how it happened but at the moment both the NIT and the province are ruled by the same person - hence the same domain.

For what purposes? For bookkeeping and simple accounting, sure, I agree. For understanding how to roleplay conflicts within Talinie, you've just ironed away all the differences. Players should inhabit a world where Talinie and the NIT seem distinct, because they have separate histories, identities, aims, and because they will conflict over how to manage resources.

Domain is a way of measuring "personal power". How one handles one aspect has a direct relationship with the others. Regents are associated with all they hold and rule.

This definition is useful for explaining the game to a new person. Its an over-simplification that can't come to terms with all the manifest ways that humans actually govern one another. All rules simplify and abstract things to make game play flow swiftly and easily, but who wants to reside in a game where things end with the rules-friendly understanding of a realm?

Almost all of Cerilia is fraught with strife and conflicts (hence the one of the basic constructs of the game - and directly linked to the title of the Anuire sourcebook "Ruins of Empire".

But the BR system doesn't explain any of this. It explains how a domain collects GB, Regency, and manages how realms conflict in very abstract ways - the realm actions. Nothing in the rules explains why domains conflict of what the nature of that conflict would look or feel like. So you might understand why "I contest his holding in Greensward" gives you no idea what is actually going on. We have a nice system to explain how and when I can apply my organization and its GB and RP to oppose another organization to consume his GB and RP, and maybe destroy a few levels of holding, but that's it.

The comparison to the paladin-prince of Ariya is a great example. So is the paladin ruler of Elinie. Every paladin ruler would be torn between duty to the state and duty to their deity. Why does this need to be reflected via different "domains"?

It doesn't. You've mistaken a character role play issue for a setting (in the dramatic sense) issue. The conflict that is important to the DM, is how various parts of the domain get along. Factions ready to do harm to one another within a domain can usefully be described as two domains so that you can regulate the conflict between them. There are rules for conflict between realms, what rules are there for conflict within realms?

It makes no sense mechanically or even common sense-wise to split things up so. It will only serve to make the domain level of play that more complex (mechanically) when it is already a difficult thing to handle overall.

I am not advocating doing the additional paperwork of splitting realms, I'm talking about how NPC's see their organizations. Its a different thing entirely.

IMO - rolling more than one random event for a single regent is just plain harsh. This would keep the player constantly dealing with them, regardless of domain size or structure.

That's because you see a random event as a means to a punative mechanic, and I see a random event as a promt to action. In standard D&D the players are adrift in a world of possibilities, so DM's create hooks to engage players interests. BR shouldn't work this way. The world should create so many things to respond to that players have the opposite problem, because there is not enough time to respond to all the issues an optimum state could address. I could hardly object to 10 random events per season. If I had to time to flesh this many random events out and put at least the outline of an adventure behind each one, I would do it. Then I would just adapt the mechanic to suit what I was doing. What is important is that however you do the random events, the risk and reward is comensorate with the resources of the domain. If you are just applying the rules as written, then I know you're not doing that, and going easy on some domains and being too hard on others.

[AndrewTall]

If using my random events checker - or any similar system based on size of holding - you could divide the odds of an event into slabs - i.e a large realm has a 45% chance of a random event, of which 35% comes from province/law and 10% from temple. Thus on a roll of 01-35 you have a province/law random event and 36-45 you get a temple random event. Hmm, my inner maths geek is showing

In terms of multiple domains I'd keep the stress internal - we know it's there, as the game dictates it can be dormant or active (i.e. the domain is storming away everyone is happy, the domain loses a major battle, is suffering harshly for some reason and the cracks start to show). So if for example Boeruine started to crack down on the NIT with taxes and the like. the nobles of Talinie might complain about the amount of funds going south to win support for the faith, if harvests are poor and taxes suffer the church starts complaining about how the tithes of the faithful are subsidising the trappings of state and all those idle nobles...

I like the idea of not explaining the game system to players - one of the best D&D games I ever played the DM kept the character sheets - we got told 'wow that blow really kncocked you back' and the like but never really knew how strong/weak we were compared to our foes - it kept us on our toes constantly! It doesn't work so well with some players (those who love to crunch the odds etc) and is even more work for the hard-pressed GM but can be a lot of fun.

[irdeggman]

I'm afraid its the mechanics that happen behind the scenes, the roleplaying is foreground.

Not really at the domain level. That level is elevated to teh 10,000 ft level which makes the little things that characters do individually ahve little impact.

Maybe it was, but as ConjurerDragon points out, the more realms you control, the more stable things become, which is backwards. Bigger realms have more going on, not less.

And I don't disagree with that at all.

If a regent governs many different holdings he can not focus on all of them at once. The "mechanics" work to keep that in check. In Talanie for example if the thane dedicated attention to the the province related stuff (roads, armies, even law holdings) then attention to the temple aspect gets put to the side. This opens that up to "outside" influence and "contesting". Since the thane has used up her actions she can't "contest" those new temple holdings that are serving as the bae for this new "unrest".

No reason what so ever to treat them as separate "domains" only as part of the many things that need attention.

This definition is useful for explaining the game to a new person. Its an over-simplification that can't come to terms with all the manifest ways that humans actually govern one another. All rules simplify and abstract things to make game play flow swiftly and easily, but who wants to reside in a game where things end with the rules-friendly understanding of a realm?

But it is much better than the fuzzy logic being applied that seemingly separates parts of domains into separate domains based on how the DM sees it. If that logic is not applied to all domains and regents then it looses it's advantage. Saying that Medoere is too small to be split into separate domains - when it has many "similar" issues going on (Endier and Diemed for example) is seemingly a hand wave approach to what a DM wants to do.

But the BR system doesn't explain any of this. It explains how a domain collects GB, Regency, and manages how realms conflict in very abstract ways - the realm actions. Nothing in the rules explains why domains conflict of what the nature of that conflict would look or feel like. So you might understand why "I contest his holding in Greensward" gives you no idea what is actually going on. We have a nice system to explain how and when I can apply my organization and its GB and RP to oppose another organization to consume his GB and RP, and maybe destroy a few levels of holding, but that's it.

But separating things into separate domains doesn't help either it just makes the "problem" you are listing as even more widespread since it now applies to many more situations.

It doesn't. You've mistaken a character role play issue for a setting (in the dramatic sense) issue. The conflict that is important to the DM, is how various parts of the domain get along. Factions ready to do harm to one another within a domain can usefully be described as two domains so that you can regulate the conflict between them. There are rules for conflict between realms, what rules are there for conflict within realms?

Hmmm the same ones?

The rules on how to handle "attitude" or "loyatly" and "agitation" as a domain action.

The actions of an individual on his own have little impact on the rest of the world. Regents get domain actions because they "involve" many other peopel in what they are doing.

I am not advocating doing the additional paperwork of splitting realms, I'm talking about how NPC's see their organizations. Its a different thing entirely.

NPCs and PCs should be functioning the same on this aspect. I don't understand why you would want to treat them separately.

That's because you see a random event as a means to a punative mechanic, and I see a random event as a promt to action. In standard D&D the players are adrift in a world of possibilities, so DM's create hooks to engage players interests. BR shouldn't work this way. The world should create so many things to respond to that players have the opposite problem, because there is not enough time to respond to all the issues an optimum state could address. I could hardly object to 10 random events per season. If I had to time to flesh this many random events out and put at least the outline of an adventure behind each one, I would do it. Then I would just adapt the mechanic to suit what I was doing. What is important is that however you do the random events, the risk and reward is comensorate with the resources of the domain. If you are just applying the rules as written, then I know you're not doing that, and going easy on some domains and being too hard on others.

But anything that calls the regent to action (not in what he was planning on doing) - which in most player's case is the Brain's philosophy "the same as it is every day 'trying to take over the world' " - is punative since it draws his resources away from his "original plan".

And historically (based on all of the games that I've run) regents have far too much to do and too little time to do it in without responding to more random events. I try to keep track of NPC domains in the same area and their actions too - which are in no way random events. These actions keep the PC regents so busy that they have to stretch their resources to the limit - even when I try to make it simple.

I guess you should give your definition of what a domain is so that we will at least have an understanding of the basic foundation we are each coming from.

[irdeggman]

well there's also the matter of how you keep players engaged. I do domain turns "between adventures" allowing the players to come to me with their turn so it's not taking up someone's game time.

2 random events that are being role-played out (granted I know most people just roll it and not role it) would take awhile.

I like the idea of alternating the problems or presenting the player with envelope A or B for their random event. Then just resolve one.

And that is pretty much how I always tried to run my games.

I tried to get the players to do domain actions via e-mail so I could concentrate on adventures when we all got together at the table.

People tend to get bored waiting on some other player's domain actions - especially when they don't invole theri character at all.

Some domain actions absolutely have to be done at the table - but quite a lot can be done electronically.

[Beruin]

First let's agree that there is a difference between rules (which are a sad neccesity) and role playing, (which is what the game is really all about), and that things which are the same in the rules don't have to be the same in the role play world.

Agreed.

From a strict rules perspective, there is nothing mechanically that says Talinie and the NIT are two organizations. From a role playing perspective, I don't know how you can read the Talinie PS and not see tension and conflict within Thuriene Donalls organization. The best domestic conflicts in any realm pit two constituancies against one another.

Domain is a way of measuring "personal power". How one handles one aspect has a direct relationship with the others. Regents are associated with all they hold and rule.

I guess you should give your definition of what a domain is so that we will at least have an understanding of the basic foundation we are each coming from.

I guess part of this debate stems from using the term 'domain' to describe different things. Kenneth already introduced the term 'organization', and this might be more fitting for what he describes as it's not so closely tied to the BR rules, though both terms might be interchangeable too some degree:

The question is: Does Thuriene Donalls control two organizations or just one and how do the locals perceive this?

I believe that both views, Kenneth' and mine, are basically valid. The answer depends on how strongly rooted in Talinie's society you perceive the NIT. Do the locals still feel that they are living in a secular barony that just happens to be ruled by priest or do they perceive Talinie and the NIT as one entity?

And how is the realm ruled below the domain level? Is the administration done through the church hierarchy or by local lords? For example, if taxes are regularly collected by priests, sooner or later many commoners would see the NIT priests as representatives of Talinie, and though this might not increase the popularity of the church, it would foster a stronger sense of unity between the land and the church.

In effect, your answers depend on how you want to describe both the realm and the church.
Granted I haven't reread the PS prior to posting, so Kenneth might be closer to the mark, but from what I recall (and from the wiki) the information is sketchy enough that there is no exclusively true 'official' answer to the above questions.

Okay, I feel I'm riding the fence here, but I believe Endier does provide an easier and more clear cut example of one regent ruling two organizations or domains. A commoner in Endier sees his ruler as the head of the Endieran Council and the civil bureaucracy and that is what he is concerned with. He also knows that his count is filthy rich and controls a vast trade network, but he has no insight into or contact with this organization (apart from buying his bread and butter from the merchant next door).

Here, more clearly than in the Talinie/NIT issue, the domain rules (over-)simplify things for the sake of convenience. Guilder Kalien probably keeps the administration and the finances of Endier and Heartlands Outfitters separate and has separate records for both his organizations. He can draw on resources from both organizations, and thus the domain rules lump both together.

However, depending on what he wants to do, he'll finance his actions from different coffers. A road built within Endier would be financed by the civil bureaucracy, while the money to finance a trade war would come from Heartlands Outfitters.
Reasonably, it could even be assumed that the two are separate domains with their own headquarters, i.e. courts, but this would increase the maintenance cost.