I too hate the assassination domain action with a passion.
I ruled that a successful result merely allowed the “opportunity” to have an assassin get in position. I would then role-play it (or have a mini-combat) to resolve.
The reasoning behind this one is that if the players can do it then so can the NPCs and in most likelihood the NPCs are much more connected than the PCs at the beginning. If you use this on the PCs (a single die roll) I can almost guarantee that they will all feel totally screwed and disillusioned about palying. What do you mean I had no way to get out of it? My PC has a huge AC, regeneration and a lot of magical defenses in place.
The Gorgon should be able to assassinate pretty much any PC at any time he wants to if the domain action is reduced to a mere dice roll.
As far as any assassin’s guild goes - I would say that they are almost exclusively under the perview of Eloele. See the novel the Hag’s Contract for what I mean.
She will step on pretty much anyone who treads into her territory without the proper respect.
>This is the kind of thing where I apply the “would you like it if
>they did it to you” test.
>
>Players accept contest actions, agitate actions, and the rest, but
>the idea that a PC could be taken out by a single espionage action
>is upsetting. So, because players don`t want it done to them, they
cant do it back. Major NPCs can only be gotten to in the same way
PC`s can be gotten to.
Years ago I played in a short-lived BR PBeM that was short-lived
because of the exploitation of the rather vague and expansive
assassination function at the domain level. It killed the game in
several senses… So in my experience one has to keep a handle on
that action in particular. An assassins guild campaign could be particularly problematic in this regard since it could potentially turn the entire BR setting NPC write ups into a hit list. Dont get
me wrong, I like the idea of DMing a BR campaign that focuses on such
a group. Ive written up BR organizations in the past that are very similar, if not identical to such organizations. Im just suggesting
one should keep certain things in check.
>As far as any assassin`s guild goes - I would say that they are
almost exclusively under the perview of Eloele. See the novel the
Hag`s Contract for what I mean.
>
>She will step on pretty much anyone who treads into her territory
>without the proper respect.
Eloele is the most obvious choice, but the concept of a group
dedicated to assassination is broad enough that any number of
variations could exist. In the write up I did for an ehrshegh called
the Nightowl, there is an organization called the Sisters of Sleep
that could be interpreted as an assassins` guild dedicated to
Ruornil. It included a prestige class that was based on the Assassin.
How about using the “modern” approach. Assassination could be regarded as a military solution, so why not just restrict it to military groups or spy networks, ie. mercenaries, strike forces. They have the expertise in weapon usage, infiltration etc. and they can have other uses/sources of income. Therefore assassination is but part of their capabilities. It can be set up as a multi-person event, even though the actual act is only carried out by one individual. After all, distractions, forgery, reconnaissance may all need to be done before hand and extraction may be needed afterwards.
Of course, this means that there is no “guild” as such.
I respectfully disagree. A kingdom in dire need of stone or lumber would be VERY willing to discuss terms. Try smuggling tons of granite a hundred miles. Smuggling clothing could be an option EXCEPT the amount of goods needing to be transported vs. the primitive transportation options and the necessity of using “the kings road” would make it difficult. Also in most cases the sheer amount of goods smuggled would necessitate the use of the “Kings Road” or other roadways. Not to mention, that while you are correct with the under policed statement, in birthright those dang paladins of haylen are out there every day acting as the police. My vision of the world tells me, at least Anuire is better policed than any medieval RL counterpart.
Nobody needs lumber or granite. It limits you to substitute materials, but such materials always exist. In the case of lumber, you might not be able to build a fleet locally, but you can either have ships constructed elsewhere, or do without a fleet. These are simply not dire neccesities.
Originally Posted by kgauck
I think the effect of a trade embargo is near zero. It has little, if any, effect in a largely globalized modern economy. It would have no effect on economies that are almost entirely self sufficient. Plus, smuggling is so much more normal and easy to do in an underpoliced medieval society.
The problem with a trade embargo is that you must be willing to enforce it AND punish people who violate it. Modern embargos are big with politicians saying no oil trade with country X. Maybe even putting ships off the coast to monitor it but when country Y drives tanker trucks into country X and removes the oil nothing happens. Especially when country Y just happens to be your ally.
In BRCS terms, Tuornen decides to halt trade with Alamie by allying with Guilder Kalien and using Tuor troops to blockade the borders it shares with Alamie. Guilder Kalien uses his influence to help block trade with Alamie. Next Domain Round/Turn, Baron Ghoere sends a heavily protected trade convoy into Alamie. Guilder Kalien would not want to risk a war with Ghoere so he looks the other way. Meanwhile, Tuornen is wondering why its’ embargo is not working.
Well, the partial answer to the trade ropute problem is that armed troops refuse to let the convoy into Endier. There’s nothing apparently stopping other routes though.
If we re-term assassins as stealth and infiltration operatives (albeit specialised in termination of life), they suddenly seem a lot more open for use. After all, an assassin who has already broken into the lord’s bedchamber could leave the aforementioned Jelly Baby head and then simply rifle the lord’s private papers for spying purposes.
But it is hard to “justify” an assassin’s guild as a “Guild” holding, something that generates income in GB on a regular basis.
It is far easier to justify hiring individual assassins to do the dirty work - which falls more in the role-playing realm than the domain level one, IMO.
Some of the suggestions sounds more like James Bond in a borealis hat. Medieval or early modern espionage doesn’t have this kind of feel. Period operations might include:
[ul]
[li] Infliltration of a noble household. There are no advantages to breaking in with a team of spys, the advantages of being inside require that can move about, hear conversations, and have access to the noble family. So, you put a man into their house as stable master, so you know their comings and goings. Or as a server so you can descreetly poison supper.
[/li][li] Bribery. Most of the people who work in a noble house work for pay, not out of loyalty. The only thing keeping them from selling secrets is fear of reprisals should they be discovered. You need to find someone who is desperate or has a particularly high threshold of fear. For instance, the lord has no papers, he’s not a clerk. Instead you bribe a clerk in his Chancery.
[/li][li] Identify the disaffected in the service or domain of the lord, from scullery maids, chancellors, or members of the town council. Whoever might be liable to bribery or being turned is scouted out and passed on to people who do the actual bribery.
[/li][/ul]
I’d check out a brief paper on the subeject, “Espionage and Intelligence from the Wars of the Roses to the Reformation”.
It includes the classic line from Philippe de Commynes that messengers, diplomats, and spys are basically the same thing. Recall the work of the Spanish Ambassador in the movie Elizabeth. Spymasters like Walsingham were just guys who specialized, in 3.5 terms, in having an unusually large number of contacts whom they could activate for pay on demand. They specialized in devising and uncovering plots. Spys can’t be terribly secret becuase they live in a world in which strangers and outsiders are always suspect as trouble anyway. Nobles are surrounded by people they know and family. Another good video source is the mini-series Rome from HBO.
>Every time I suggest guilds to my players they want assassin guilds. I`m not against the idea but I do get a little frustrated
by it being the only guild people want to run (because its soooo coool). So when I allow those guilds they dont generate “money”
like normal guilds. After all its not a steady flow of income its contracts, and you have to be successful to collect on a contract.
From a BR domain level POV, I dont think an assassins guild is necessarily a guild holding. It could certainly be portrayed that way, but a group of assassins could easily take the form of provinces and any of the three population based holdings. Law and guild holdings are obvious, but assassination organizations from history and fantasy fiction often have a very particular religious aspect to them as well, so temple holdings are perfectly apt. Such holdings would be “covert” in several cases, but they could take several forms.
This has been my gripe with an assassins "guild." It shouldnt be treated as an income-generating guild under the BR rules, as those are based on population and activity, which generate RP and GB for the regent. IF one is going to have an assassins organization, thats fine (Im forming ideas for something like it in my future campaigns), but not as a regents level guild.
An assassins guild would be best hidden inside another guild (or a military or religious group) - most probably a merchants guild. Therefore it has legitimate interests and revenue + a “black ops wing”
As people have pointed out - there can be much more to an assassins “guild” than simple “wet work”. There is Spying, infiltration, sabotage, threats and intimidation, counter Assassination, counter intelligence, selling information, blackmail etc. Their can be a great deal of crossover with thieving work - but typically very little petty larceny.
All of these can certainly place a guild in a very powerful (if ethically disgraceful) position.
I would argue that almost any thieves guild/merchants guilds would have shadier members, spy networks (called contacts with information if your a nice guild), guards and/or people that know people with shadier histories.
Personally I don’t like my players to run such guilds or be of evil alignment however if you want It should not be a easy thing to run.
Infiltration, bids for power, risk of discovery should all complicate matters for the prospective assassins.
Also are they trying to move into the territory of an older established guild that will be unhappy with competition?
I think it would be more like an assassin hidden in another holding, not a group of assassins. A single assassin who performed a minor assassination once per domain turn would be outrageously busy (though Gary is right to point out that fantasy games tend to have high body counts anyway), but a group of assassins pushes things way beyond that. 72 assassinations per year (just six assassins working once per domain turn) implies such a level of violence that its hard to imagine anyone is being careful, covert, and selective, and rather suggests gang war type direct violence in which any killer is employed to strike at an enemy operation.
>I think it would be more like an assassin hidden in another holding,
>not a group of assassins. A single assassin who performed a minor
>assassination once per domain turn would be outrageously busy
>(though Gary is right to point out that fantasy games tend to have
>high body counts anyway), but a group of assassins pushes things way
>beyond that. 72 assassinations per year (just six assassins working
>once per domain turn) implies such a level of violence that its hard
>to imagine anyone is being careful, covert, and selective, and
>rather suggests gang war type direct violence in which any killer is
>employed to strike at an enemy operation.
Professional gang war is probably the best descriptor for such a
campaign. Though it comes from a much later period and a very
different culture, I`d suggest reading up on Murder Inc in order to
get some idea about how such a fantasy organization might
operate. One could take even more fantastic elements and employ
them. “Assassination Teams” a la the Kill Bill movies not only
exemplify how that might work, but also suit the more gonzo game
mechanics of D20 pretty well IMO…
One emphasis of such a campaign would be to make the murders look
like accidents or natural causes so as to not stress bodycount
overmuch, but in gaming we often just have to accept a higher level
of activity than most people find realistic.
Exactly how to portray such a group at the domain level (as guild,
law or temple holdings) is up for grabs. It might not even really
exist at the domain level as much more than level 1 or level 0
holdings. Personally, I have trouble imagining a strictly crime
based organization being a dominant holding in a domain. Thats why the Sisters of Sleep are an adjunct of a more typical temple holding. Thats arguably a matter of bias on my part, but I`d
suggest it is also reflected in the game materials by portraying
those regents who emphasize illicit activity as smaller and less
powerful. But as a campaign that still works perfectly well. In
fact, to bridge the adventure and domain levels it might be ideal.
The main crime based holdings would be smugglers who sneak goods past taxes, tolls, and tarrifs; counterfitters who produce fake coins made of baser metals; and taverns that run extended prostitution, gambling, and other vice oriented activities that are illegal. Extortion, fencing, etc.
Basically the crime has to be directly money making. But I could see a crime boss guild organization. I still think it would have a lot of legitimate operations, because there is always more money in regular goods and services than in crime-only. But a guild might have a smuggling holding here, and extortion holding there, a counterfitter over there, and then the normal allotment of butchers, bakers, and candlestick-makers.
72 assassinations per year (just six assassins working once per domain turn) implies such a level of violence that its hard to imagine anyone is being careful, covert, and selective, and rather suggests gang war type direct violence in which any killer is employed to strike at an enemy operation.
Can I respectfully point out the next line - assassins can do a lot more than just Kill (and a lot of their operations can cross over with other groups - military, thieves etc but tend to be politically motivated) Thus once at least half the assassinations are disguised as accidents, falls, hunting mistakes, bandit attacks only a handful of attacks would be seen true assassinations in a fairly large and violent roleplaying WORLD.
If you like an assassins guild in your fantasy world then wack it in. If you don’t the don’t.
Sure, but this goes without saying because its always true. Armies of flying dragons, floating cities, the standard multiverse, psionics, &c. My objection wasn’t that it was bad for a fantasy game, it was that it was implausible.