Bloodlines - 2nd Edition/v.3.5/BRCS

[irdeggman]

Based on past "discussion" and polls (I can't refer to them direclty though so I have go on memory).

There is a rough split of people who use primarily adventure style BR gaming another block who does mostly domain level play and another group that does a mix of the two. There was a significant amount in any of the three categories of play (well based on those who actually "voted", which is the only way to attempt to quantify anything).

The BRCS was designed (like the original BR rules set) to do the latter.

It would never be the best at domain level nor the best at adventure level play because of the necessity.

Designing a system around domain (e.g. regent) and intrigue works very well at the domain level style but not so well at the adventure level ones.

Maintaining a tight "balance" {I know many people hate that word) is essential at the adventure level but not so much at the domain level.

I truely believe that is where the "problems" have their basis.

I do not agree with everything in the BRCS (nor in the final versions of Chap 1 and 2) but they were what the concensus was hence the resultant product. I have pretty much adamantly refused to dictate a set of rules only to take the stance that the inclusiveness in the development of the BRCS chap1 and 2 is what is of paramount importance. Everyone at the time had a chance to play and shape them, just becasue some chose not to does not invalidate the fact that others did.

[irdeggman]

The BRCS doesn't address the other intricate plots that seem perfectly suited to BR. It doesn't provide rules for running adventures of intrigue. Yet, LotHK has a lot of them.

Elton.

Basically because the BRCS was designed to be a rule-basis, that is mechanical issue and not an atlas adventure style book. Even though Chap 8 was supposed to be the place to insert things of DM topics like that, but the BRCS was already huge in size - there was a lot of flak over how large the playtest file was when people were trying to download back in the day.


I have always been an advocate of an Unearthed Birthright document that contained various optional rules that people could drop in - but it never got that far.

The original concept of the BRCS was also to provide a standard 3.5 basis for people to write up their own adventures and publish them - which would have directly lead to the type of thing you are talking about. Again it never happened. I don't there has been a fan-written adventure ever posted on this site for any version of the rules and that is a shame since even if the rulesets are different adventure plots and the like always can help other DMs.

[kgauck]

Based on past "discussion" and polls (I can't refer to them direclty though so I have go on memory).

http://www.birthright.net/forums/showthread.php?t=3055

The poll is at that link. You ran it in August 2006.

The recent poll that Elton ran recently (its still on the main page) is a different question, but it suggests the same kinds of answers.

[Elton Robb]

Yep. It does. A lot of people run Birthright at the Adventure level. That was back in 2006.

[bbeau22]

Basically because the BRCS was designed to be a rule-basis, that is mechanical issue and not an atlas adventure style book. Even though Chap 8 was supposed to be the place to insert things of DM topics like that, but the BRCS was already huge in size - there was a lot of flak over how large the playtest file was when people were trying to download back in the day.


I have always been an advocate of an Unearthed Birthright document that contained various optional rules that people could drop in - but it never got that far.

The original concept of the BRCS was also to provide a standard 3.5 basis for people to write up their own adventures and publish them - which would have directly lead to the type of thing you are talking about. Again it never happened. I don't there has been a fan-written adventure ever posted on this site for any version of the rules and that is a shame since even if the rulesets are different adventure plots and the like always can help other DMs.

I did write this very short adventure... Song of the Sirens (link fixed ~ T.)


I am not saying it is a great work of art or anything... but it is based off of the 3.5 rules of BRCS.

-BB

[AndrewTall]

See this "idea" is what was lost on the masses. That is what I've been trying to say - it is a guideline that should be made as clear as possible and not assuming that those posting know what it is.

And yet it is obvious that they do.

Sorry, it never occurred to me anyone would have a problem telling me that I've written something crap - but then at the start of the wiki it was mostly me and Ken writing and commenting on each other's stuff

I believe that those closest to the project have the hardest time stepping back and looking at it with the eyes of the ignorant. In general this is a fact of life in all aspects so it is nothing specific to the wiki.

All too true, that's why I like it when people criticise - I learn and grow even if only in my ability to communicate that I'm right - as a friend once said, all the best learning processes are mutual.

Remember the key is "new players" not the old timers, who in all likelihood already have all of the 2nd ed material, have read most things posted on this site (including the BRCS) and come up with their own version of how to use the information in their game.

Fair point, and one reason that unlike Ken I like brcs - it gives a easy introduction to the rules, its also though why I like the wiki - if you are looking for fluff on a topic it should be easy to find something relevant.

stoked my dislike of something I have never appreciated, the gamist concerns of D&D for balance, instead of world-building and story

Having played Rifts I can never agree with this. Or more accurately, never agree in adventure level play regarding player v player - I'm fine with unbalanced realms. If one PC is far weaker / stronger it damages roleplay within the party group. This doesn't really hit PBEM's or games where everyone has domain power, but hits heavily if the PC's adventure together a lot.

Sorry. I have two modes. Passionate and direct, or academic and dense. Friendly and chatty is unnatural to me.

Really? We would never have guessed Ken.

Legends of the Hero Kings proved that. The adventures in LotHK are all based around the domain action.

I thought that was actually the whole point of HK? To take a domain action and convert it? Either way your point is 100% true. For Dhoesone I'm trying to do some adventure ideas, I'm taking a domain action and breaking it into adventure sketches...

[Sorontar]

Doyle posted his adventure "The Fool's Reward" (http://www.birthright.net/forums/dow...?do=file&id=41) but that was based on the AD&D rules. It is very simple and easy to convert since little of it is Br rules-related. Only two of the characters are blooded, but a lot of how the PCs interact is related to their social and romantic thoughts towards each other. The adventure has a Br setting but it is pretty much a standard problem-solving adventure. It was based on one of Shakespeare's plays. Doyle likes to convert them.

Sorontar

[AndrewTall]

Having thought a little more about it, the vanilla convert job I did has an underlying logic error - the new bloodline should be gained immediately when the bloodline hits the appropriate band in the old rules - a) that it when it would have been gained in 2e and b) otherwise you need feats not just to boost power level, but also gain the ability in the first place. I attach the corrected version.