Blood Abilities: Domain Level

Dungeons & Dragons BRCS 4th Edition
21

Okay, I haven’t read all of these yet and I don’t yet have my 4e books (though I’ve followed much of the development online).

It seems to me, though, that there is some mixed discussion of adventure-oriented powers in this thread. In the other bloodlines thread, I think we agreed that adventure-oriented powers (the majority of current 2e and 3e bloodline powers) would be tied to character level and be added to the list of class abilities or feats that a character could take (or maybe characters will even get additional feats or powers just so that they can buy a few of these on top of normal class abilities, I don’t know yet).

If this thread is focused on realm-level domain powers, then we should keep the discussion to those things, like what Sorontar had proposed. Realm-level powers (per the other thread) will remain completely separate from class and level. Essentially, they will use a system very similar to the 2e/3e one.

I suggest moving away from a table that you have to reference to know how many realm-level powers you get, though. Perhaps each derivation still has its limitations on realm powers available, and these still fit into Minor, Major, and Great categories, but the number available could be tied to blood score in a different fashion. If we could assign each power a point value based on our estimation of its relative strength (which could then easily be tweaked by the community or each DM if they wish), then each scion would get a number of points to “purchase” blood abilities equal to their bloodline score.

So, a Major bloodline of 23 might be able to purchase 3 minor power costing 3, 4, and 6, and one major power costing 10, while a Major bloodline of 45 might also be able to purchase two more major powers at costs 10 and 12. If that’s too complicated, it could be streamlined so that minor powers all cost 5, major 10, and great 15.

As for what realm level powers should be, I suggest thinking up things that modify the game like so:
Allow an additional Court action of a certain type
Allow a standard action of a certain type to be conducted as a Court action
Modify any of the various combat variables (unit statistics, terrain or weather effects, hero units, etc.)
Mimic, in a unique and probably limited fashion, a realm spell
Alter holding statistics in some fashion (gaining an extra bonus to assisting an action like Espionage or gaining extra GB or RP income from one holding)
Aid in the resolution of a random event
Cause a random event

As for frequency, most powers should only be usable once per domain turn. Stronger bloodlines or weaker powers might be usable once per month. I also could see where some powers might require a little RP or GB to activate.

In the coming week I’ll start posting some of my ideas for possible realm powers, though a number of good ones have already been listed here.

22

Rowan,

 Many of your realm blood powers sound good.  Start up a new thread with proposed realm blood powers and we can go from there.  Then everyone can post ideas and critisims.

-BB

23

The issue is, hertiage. You inherit the bloodline, but it shouldn’t pigeonhole you into being a wizard with Vorynn’s blood (infact there is a vos paladin in the core setting that has Vorynn’s blood) 2E made it where Vorynn’s ability weren’t exclusivly benefical to Wizards. The way classes work now, it will be hard to set something that doesn’t.

The last clause in this statement doesn’t make sense. Please rephrase.

What I mean is: Although courage (as an example) is something that best benefits the warriors (defenders in 4e terms), it has a utility to non warriors as well.

I don’t see the problem here. If Vorynn is a sub-optimal mix with fighter, and a player doesn’t want it for story reasons, why pick it? Select Anduiras or something else.

The problem is, we end up punishing players for story reasons.

Let’s not get ahead of ourselves. Both druids and pet masters will come in time, they’re supposed to follow in later books. Second both are social roles as much as they are classes, and its perfectly reasonable to have the social role without the class. Given the god of Erik, and the social order of the Rjuirk people, I think we’ll always have druids and rangers who are tied to Erik/nature. If you want to use the ranger class to describe an Anuirean robin hood, that’s fine. I think we’ll see all of what bbeau22 is describing in the 1st year of the game.

Actually Rangers are now more hard hitting warriors then they are nature bound, a Ranger is either tied to the bow or twin weapons. Either way they deal damage primarily.

Druids are coming when they release Primal, which may be PHB2 or 3 (2 or 3 years down the road), by not focusing on what May or May not be a druidc power and may or may not be given deffination as such (animal empathy) and instead finding a way to word it where it doesn’t rely on primal sources having empathy with animals, we would do better.

Pet/Master will be 1 creature, which is already crippling Greater Animal Affinity. That or will violate the economy of actions which is why summoning isn’t allowed yet. The cleric who does have some ‘summon’ abilities all use the cleric actions in place of their own, it stands to reason that when a summoner class does appear its more likely to be a leader type who does the same.

Next, from the looks of the powers, he was focusing on adventure level ones. If adventure level powers are to be worth it they must be on par power wise as current adventure powers and feats, if they fail there (like having empathy with a single type of animals who may or may not be present in an adventure) then they fail to be worthwhile.

24

Not really.

Vorynn’s blood made it a better fit for a wizard.

Using the 4th ed system (like in races) Vorynn’s blood could give a “boost” to wizard powers - very 4th ed and also BR.

It was also noted that the Vos paladin was totally out of place.

There was also a paladin with Azrai blood and it painted that he was in constant struggle with his blood line derivation and the pull of Azrai.

The problem is, we end up punishing players for story reasons.

Punish is a hard word. A player chose a difficult path - make it one and not just merely a “background” issue with no mechanical challenges.

What you have to watch for are players who see “choices” as nothing more than mechanical advantages and not role-playing tools (this is an inherent problem with 4th ed as I see it, since it is much more PC game-esqu and less role-playing emphasis. Alignment has pretty much been “neutered” in 4th ed).

25

I would rather see Vorynn’s powers boost things that directly tie into the majority of wizard’s abilities, but strictly speaking just wizards.
Like say, granting bonuses to hit against will defenses and such.

It was also noted that the Vos paladin was totally out of place.

More for being vos paladin then for his bloodline/class combination.

There was also a paladin with Azrai blood and it painted that he was in constant struggle with his blood line derivation and the pull of Azrai.

I remember the manticore was also a paladin at one point, but his blood was tainted to Azari, and Azari has always been a special case. The others wether good or mildly evil didn’t carry the tain. There are evil people with Anduris blood in them, after all.

Punish is a hard word. A player chose a difficult path - make it one and not just merely a “background” issue with no mechanical challenges.

Punish is the right word, other scions get special abilities that directly boost their classes, because someone else chose a diffrent path they have no way to directly benifit from it (at least the way the blood abilities seem to be headed) why then bother to be off classed with the blood? The system shouldn’t encourage, but neither should it go out of its way to cripple people who want to be ‘oddities’.

What you have to watch for are players who see “choices” as nothing more than mechanical advantages and not role-playing tools (this is an inherent problem with 4th ed as I see it, since it is much more PC game-esqu and less role-playing emphasis. Alignment has pretty much been “neutered” in 4th ed).

Actually, overall Evil is easier to play in game now then it was. with the loss of the instant detect evil abilities, there is less concern. They did simplfy the alignment, but as I largely ignored alignment in all verisions of DnD (and all other roleplaying games) it hardly matters to me.

26

I guess I will just pipe in on two points.

The first is that of Derivation. The player can choose his or her class and his or her derivation. If she chooses Vornyn Fighter, then she will of course not be as optimized as an Aduiras Fighter. I think taking away the uniqueness of each bloodline dilutes what makes Birthright, well, Birthright.

As to tying Bloodpowers to level, again I lean towards 2E. Blood powers separates those with the blood of gods int heir veins from those without. If two equally skilled fighters faced each other, the one with a Bloodline would have an advantage. Again, I come back to the title of the setting “Birthright.” It is about the actual manifestation of the divine right to rule.

Just my two cents.

27

I don’t think anyone wants to lose that side of Birthright. The Divine Power does flow through them and they are the only ones that can be true rulers of the land, the only ones that can cast true magic. Just a slightly more balanced verison. With blood powers that fighter will get access to abilities that another fighter couldn’t think of having.

28

For most minor NPCs, their culture will chose their bloodline. Most of the blooded Rjurik will have Reynir’s bloodline. How they then progress in life is up to them. If the blood abilities don’t really start revealing themselves until they are in their teens, then it could be thought that this would steer them towards a career that makes the most of their new skills. However, this isn’t so. People don’t always act like that. There are often over-riding reasons to take alternative paths, e.g. family traditions, community and personal needs. Therefore, I feel that no connection should be forced in BRCS 4e (or any other edition) between class and bloodline.

When we are talking about PCs, the heroes of the future, whose players tend to chose their bloodlines, I feel that if a player wants to optimise their PC’s class, they should just pick an optimal bloodline for that class. This should be a choice of the player, not a requirement in the rules.

If the bloodline chosen is not optimal, then the player is going to have fun playing with what blood “cards” they have been dealt (or chosen). I chose Reynir for my druid, but the dice chose Long Life, Resistance and Detect Lie. The last two have been great to play adventures with. The Detect Lie even helped me design the PC’s attitude to the world. The Long Life has been fairly useless to me, but for the fact that my character looks like a 15 year old when he is actually over 20. However, it would have helped other party members who had years taken off their lives by undead. Only the Detect Lie could be thought to be helpful specifically to a druid in their advisor role within Rjurik communities. However, my druid is an adventurer so that cultural role rarely appears. Instead he uses it for other interactions with NPCs (and party members :^) ).

So what bloodline is optimal for what PC depends on how you play them. It shouldn’t be linked to specific classes.

Sorontar

29

We do that all the time. When we require a wizard to be blooded; when we don’t allow a party with human, elf, lizardman, and gnome; when we reshuffle allies and enemies because of political changes above the level of the PC; any time we impose consequences because of player actions. Selecting a bloodline is a player action that has a consequence no less than selecting a class does.

30

The real key is that in 4th ed there is no “punishing” there is “rewarding”.

No penalties for low ability scores, no racial ability score minuses.

There are only “bonuses”.

This fits extremely well with the concept of bloodline derivation - some derivations “reward” certain classes and types of behavior.

IMO it helps if one thinks of derviation like being a specialty cleric in 2nd ed. A deity gave certain “abilities” and spells to his followers and expected a certain behaviour in response (alignment, philosophy, etc). This was a “direction” that they were to follow.

Blood lines were a direct result of the death of the deity - so they should have a much greater impact an a scion’s life.

They were never intended to be a mere “add on” to an existing game, they were always supposed to reflect the very nature of the setting itself.

The draw of the blood is a very real thing and should be reflected. While only Azrai is detailed (although I think that this draw is also touched on in the BoR and some of the new blood abilities added in there) it is a very tangeable thing.

I have always hated when players shose Azrai as their blood line derivation because it had the best abilities but then wanted to ignore the draw to chaotic and evil behavior (and the potential for eventually becomng an “awnie”). This is the type of behavior that should never, IMO, be “rewarded”.

A player designs his character with a “philosophy” and innate natural behavior - part of that process should involve looking for a bloodline derivation that “matches” that behavior and not one that grants abilites that they like.

31

Absolutly!

32

While I agree players should choose derivations that fit in their player concepts and ideas, the problem with derivations is the same as with the 2e Paladin: they are related to a “behavior” (aligment).

If a player wants to play a sneaky type, that loves secrets, silent, lonely but willing to help others, she will probably see that a Rogue fits (mechanically) much better my idea than a Fighter. And maybe Azrai will fit her idea (mechanically too) better than Anduiras (just an example, I don’t remember the blood powers of each). I don’t see any problem thinking in that way, the player choosed things that worked well with her idea.

But if you tie derivations with aligments like some classes did you start entering a world full of strange things and situations. And more if there’s no mechanic behind it but rather some blurred explanations that 100 people will understand in 100 different ways…

Either way, if a player chooses the derivation and she knows what are the advantages for choosing it, and she chooses willingly one that doesn’t help her, well, her call. It’s like if the same player builds a Str 8 Fighter because it fits better her idea of her character. I don’t see problems with that.

33

There are three categories, good, indifferent, and bad. Vorynn was a god of secrets, and Azrai was a god of deception. Brenna is a patron of lots of roguish things. Those would all be good matches. Anduiras and Basaia are advocates of law and truth. So unless your rogue is sneaking for those kinds of causes (plausible but narrow), they might be bad matches. The other derivations, Reynir and Masela, are indifferent, neither helping nor conflicting with the character concept.

I wonder why someone would want to play a scoundrel but picks Anduiras for a derivation. Do they worship Haelyn too? Do they go about swearing oaths to behave chivalrously too? When does the player start making choices based on their character concept?

If there’s no mechanic behind it but rather some blurred explanations that 100 people will understand in 100 different ways…

Welcome to role playing.

34

Not if you want to create a player with a really good heart. For that kind of “behavior” they range from “normal but not really fitting” (Vorynn and Brenna) to “not fitting at all” (Azrai).

That’s a really weak argument to defend a badly designed thing sorry.

35

Lets look as Scions of Brenna, which you reject.
Marlae Roesone
Erik Danig
James Ardannt
Antia Maricoere

Two of these are regents of temples of Haelyn. Marlae Roesone is clearly supposed to be a good guy, and I think Erik Danig as well. If these guys don’t have good enough hearts, I’m not sure what kind of sneaky rogue you’re thinking of. Sure there are a lot of guilders and other kinds of rogues, so I’m not sure why this isn’t actually a perfect fit.

That’s a really weak argument to defend a badly designed thing sorry.

Actually its not poorly designed, its the heart and soul of role playing. You pick a set of behavioral characteristics and then you act them out (that is role play them). I’m not sure what role playing is, if its not about staking out a character concept and then bringing that to life at the gaming table.

36

Unfortuneately that is the very core of bloodline derivations ans laid out in the original material.

But if you tie derivations with aligments like some classes did you start entering a world full of strange things and situations. And more if there’s no mechanic behind it but rather some blurred explanations that 100 people will understand in 100 different ways…

Who said they were “tied” to classes. I repeatedly said they were tied to behavior and that some classes made a better fit - not that any would not be possible (or allowed).

I also pointed out that 4th ed doesn’t contain any “penalties” everything is in terms of bonuses.

So a certain derivation gives “bonuses” to certain behaviour types (which will probably correspond to certain classes).

If a player chooses to go a different route then he doesn’t get the bonuses but likewise doesn’t have any penalties.

For example the tiefling race gives bonuses to things that relate to being a warlock. This doesn’t mean that a tiefling fighter is not allowed - only that the combination is not an optimal match.

I think that the 4th ed mechanics match very well with this concept for bloodline derivation.

37

Probably I explained myself pretty badly. I agree with derivation powers been more related to several classes as some races are more suited to several classes too. But not on the alignment thing (I think I said the word enough times in my previous posts as to make it clear :frowning: ).

One example:

  • take 100 people who know the game. Give them an attack modifer, give them an AC, and ask them the number needed to hit. All 100 will come to the same number. That’s a well designed rule.

  • take 100 people who know the game. Tell them a situation and an action taken by a paladin and ask them if the action was good or evil. Probably the 100 people won’t agree unless it’s a very extreme situation. Forcing alignment and acts by a class is not good design and pretty useless too. Same applies to relating derivations with aligments. Taking that rule out doesn’t hurt interpretation (as if you needed rules for that…).

Another thing:

I haven’t found anywhere Brenna alignment, but Sera is Chaotic Neutral, so as the closer (or one of the closers) follower of Brenna I will suppose their alignments where equal.

While irrdeggman seems to support that derivation and alignments are somewhat tied (although I’m not sure, if that’s not what you said, forget about the following), kgauck is nice enough to post regents with Brenna bloodline that are regents of temples of a LG god (I don’t have RoE to check their actual alignments, I bet most of them aren’t CN).

While it’s true that some people with Azrai derivations become Awnsheghlien or derivate towards evil acts, not all of them suffer this fate and no where the books say they can’t be as happy and behave equally as an Anduiras scion. If that’s possible, trying to tie the derivation and the alignment is again a bad call.

kgauck says it quite well later on: “you pick a set of behavioral characteristics”. That’s very different than “you are enforced into a set of behavioral characteristics”. A player should design his character freely and as he likes the most. If he wants to pick a specific derivation to support his background story, perfect. If he wants to pick a derivation because he likes the powers more, perfect too. Saying that one way is how it should be done is simply not true, it’s a matter of personal taste.

But well, to try to not lose the post in off-topic ramblings. I think is a good idea to have some derivations fit better in some classes as some races do, as irdeggman posted in his Tiefling example.

38

Gods are inherently tied to a specific archetype of behavior and often an alignment. Having a bloodline empowered with the god’s essence should have some ramifications, whether the person ends up fighting those inclinations or embraces them.

Some of the original gods can be said to be associated with an alignment in particular and probably fosters tendencies of the same; they and the rest can also be associated with specific traits. I don’t think we should divorce the derivations from these traits, though again, as I’ve said above, characters can choose to embrace them or deny them.

I would propose:
Anduiras: lawful good, honor, justice, nobility, war, law, wind/air
Basaia: good, reason, enlightenment, fire, sun
Brenna: unaligned, trickery, traveling, luck, selfishness
Masela: unaligned, the sea, water, weather, nurturing
Reynir: unaligned, the wilds, earth, balance, nature, rage, survival, self-sufficiency
Vorynn: unaligned, mystery, magic, the moon, night, secrets, rage, power/ambition
Azrai: evil

39

I see what you guys are saying. I never really DM’d in the idea that certain derivations pulled people to a certain alignment, but on the other hand certain derivations lend itself to certain classes … which many NPC naturally followed into those classes because it fit them.

The only exception to this was Azari which did pull people towards evil acts.

I think it is a great DMing tool when creating personalities for many of the NPC’s that they take the old derivations as a tool, but I wouldn’t write any of that into offical rules.

-BB

40

Book of Regency (pgs 16+)

[LEFT]The blood of Cerilia affects the scion as well.[/LEFT]

[LEFT]Regents, especially, find themselves manipulated by their bloodlines. Few scions of Anduiras can resist the call to battle; those of Reynir’s blood hearken to the trees and animals of the forest.[/LEFT]

[LEFT]And of course, Azrai’s evil taint compels the unwary and unfortunate, corrupting their hearts and minds against the good of the people Cerilia.[/LEFT]

[SIZE=2]

Finally, it explains long-range effects bloodlines can have on their
[/SIZE]
[SIZE=2]

[LEFT]scions—especially scions of Azrai.

[LEFT]As a result of possessing a signature ability, a scion may feel certain “pulls” toward or away f rom actions of a particular nature. Sometimes, these mystic tugs steer the scion into situations where he might use the ability in a manner that seems fitting to the old god from whom it is derived. In more general cases, the pull simply guides the character toward actions that would seem consistent with the old god’s nature.[/LEFT]

[LEFT]This tendency can often cause problems for characters whose personal missions, alignments, or character classes do not harmonize perfectly with the bloodline they possess. For example , a dwarf scion might have the bloodline of Masela and the sea song blood ability. Although Cerilian dwarves do not have a fondness for water, this particular dwarf might “hear” the call of a babbling brook or the crash of waves on a shore when his bloodline wants him to get close to the water—an uncomfortable situation for the dwarf.[/LEFT]

[LEFT]I think these qotes help to emphasize where I am getting my basis for how bloodline derivations tend to govern (or draw) a scion to a certain behavior. I knew I didn’t make it up on my own.[/LEFT]
[/SIZE]
[/LEFT]