Morten Helles wrote:

> 1) It is NOT very exciting. Most BR settings are set in the anuirean
> lands, where battle and conquering is the spirit, not ruling and forging
> inbreakble alliances (being friends in the real world doesn't mean you
> have to be friends in the BR game, too). Anuire is a place of action! In
> Darkstar's campaign, allow me to salute the regents of Alamie, Haelyn's
> Aegis and Zikala. They bring action and feed the anuirean newspaper with
> exciting news. Thank you! That is what we need! (or am I alone on this?)

Certainly Anuire in my campaing has been a little quiet with only one
real war happening. The Rjurik lands look like hotting up though as do
the Brecht and Khinasi lands.
I think most players like to build a solid base first then start
conquering other kingdom, and some prefer to just build up alliances and
the like. For some players this is just as exciting as setting out to
conquer other lands, as a lot easier to run in a pbem game to.
I personally prefer to go on the offensive as soon as possible the worry
about building holdings later.
With this weeks turn in my campaign there were 3 minor battles and one
major war to run so not really a lot of fighting going on.
This doesn't mean that I want all the regents in my campaign to go to
war at once as it get difficult to run a campign then (time mainly).


> 2) The rule and ally tactic spreads like a disease because if you do not
> rule also, your kingdom will grow relatively weaker. And if your
> neighbour is sponsored by that guild and that temple, you'd better have
> such sponsors too. "Keeping up with the Jones'", eh? And if everybody
> get stronger, who gain anything relatively? No one!

A kingdom with a allied guild and temple in their lands is much more
secure that one with neutral or enemy guilds and temples in their
kingdom. One thing to note about the campaign newspaper I write is that
I leave out all the contest and rule actions as they don't really make
interesting reading.


> 3) It is unrealistic. If everybody rules provinces, population will
> soar. In Darkstar's campaign (no offense, Ian, this goes to the players,
> and NOT to you) the anuirean population has doubled in 10 DTs, that is
> in less than 3 years! (who said the population of India is growing
> fast?) Please correct me if I am wrong, Ian.

I am not sure about doubled by certainly several realms have been busy
increasing their provinces at a fast rate.


> Comments? What can be done? Do the rules need to be modyfied to
> encourage offensive action? Or is everybody happy playing defensively
> and building up strong kingdoms?

I guess that depends on the regent. Birthright is a game of diplomacy as
much as a wargame so both ways of playing are just as important. You do
need a strong kingdom to carry out a war properly. In my campaign I use
NPC regents to aid or hinder the activities of PC rulers who go to war
depending on the situation and how I think the NPC would act. For
instance if a kingdom is invaded then it is likely that a guild or
temple in that realm would be likely to aid the kingdom's ruler unless
they are an enemy of the ruler.


> My second point regards lieutenants. When I order my lieutenant to do
> some domain action when does he start and when does he finish? Does it
> take one month? Three months?

I assume that Lieutenant have other thing to do during a turn. They may
also serve as a minister of a government or high priest of one of the
temples. This means that unlike the ruler, who rules and does little
else they have other duties in the running of the
government/guild/temple etc. This means that they can only spend part of
the season assisting their lord with a realm action.
That is one suggestion anyway.

- --
Ian Hoskins

e-Mail: hoss@box.net.au
ICQ: 2938300
Home Page: http://www.box.net.au/~hoss/birth.html

From the Darkness we came.
And to the Darkness we will return.