p 93, regents: Not much to say about this. The rule by council variant is
interesting.
p 94- the domain turn.
I like the way the adjusting domain attitude step works. Is there any
reason it was moved to be the first step? I liked the way it sat at the
end of the domain turn, so that attitude adjustments from actions just
passed were handled in the same turn.
p 95, Collection.
I see the rationale behind the key regent skills. Handle multiclassing.
It`s an interesting way of doing it.
One, provinces gave full RP to everyone in 2e. Presumably because the
direct rulership of people is easy to draw power from- anyone blooded can
do it. I`d like that to still be the default. It also fits with the D&D
theory of godhood, where gods draw power from worshippers.
Hmm. D&D gods also have power related to their portfolios. That`s
holdings in BR. Fighters have the portfolio of law, Clerics have temples,
etc. I like that parallel. Sorry, rambling out loud.
Two, the skill lists in table 5-9.
Do feats count for this? Skill focus is +2/+2, so you can have +6 and +6
in the two relevant skills for, say, Law holding collection, at first
level. Actually, you could do it even with the old skill focus, which is
+2 for one skill. So I assume feats don`t count.
As the 3e system currently stands, it looks like its designed so that a character who intends to be a regent from the beginning can collect full RP from his primary holding by second level. At first level, hell have 4
and 4 in the two skills, so hell collect 60% RP from those holdings. At second level, 2 more skill points, and hes got 100% collection.
Except for guilds, but those are designed heavily towards rogues (no one
else gets 8 skill points by default), only they can pull it off.
Looks like only aristocrats can get both province RP and law RP by second
level, by this design. I`m kind of ok with that.
What you get essentially is full RP by second level, for all four main
classes, and several of the other classes, in at least one holding type.
(There`s a typo in the example on the bottom of p95, it says 80%, but
means 60%.)
The problem arises with multiclassing. If you go into another one of the
basic classes after first level, it will take 5 levels or so (less if you
have a high INT) to get full RP from your new holdings. Is this a
problem? It seems ok.
I like the concept. An int skill and a charisma skill give you RP from
people; the exception is wizards, who were always different anyway. So
it`s ok.
The reason guild requirements were made so high is so that rogues, skill
masters that they are, can`t collect RP from everything else so fast yet
stay single classed, and to focus guild ownership on people with lots of
skills. Experts, rogues, and aristocrats are really the only ones who can
run guilds at full RP. Heck, so many of the Guild skills are rogue & bard
class skills that /only/ they will ever really run them.
The skill list should be cut down, to an int skill and a charisma per
holding. This is actually the only thing that`s really selling me on
Lead. Sources might be an exception- two knowledges work there.
So narrow it to:
Law: Warcraft (=Knowledge-tactics) and Lead (as long as those both are
made fighter class skills). It could just as easily be Intimidate though,
with the same caveat.
Temple: Knowledge-religion and Diplomacy.
Guild: Appraise (=Knowledge-business in 3.5e) and Bluff, + divine spells.
Source: Knowledge-arcana and Knowledge-nature (and spellcasting), +
arcane spells.
That creates about the right class:holding spread, without overlapping
skills. Doing away with 8 skills for guild holders makes guilds
attainable for cross-classers, too; it also simplifies the math and makes
table 5-10 better conceptually.
If provinces are left on the skill chart, and not free for everyone by
default, why is Warcraft used there, and not Administrate, or
Knowledge-nobility?
I dont like the extra rows on the second collection table. Too much work for too little payoff, plus you shouldnt have to crossreference skill
levels and two tables to get this step done. Say instead that if they
have 8 ranks between the appropriate two skills, they get half RP, and if
they have 10 ranks, they get full regency.
The third obvious way to do this (the first two being by class and by
skills) is with feats. Is there any particular downside to that?
A feat could be made which allows half law RP collection. A second one
allows full, and has the first as a prereq. Similarly for other
categories. What would be a good prereq for the first feat? The Master X
(ie Merchant) feat might work for that. Or skill focus. So maybe a three
feat chain for each holding- skill focus for the two appropriate skills,
then one which gives half RP, then one which gives full RP.
For example, the Law feat chain.
Lawman: gives +2/+2 to warcraft and lead.
Law regent: prereq lawman; allows half law RP collection.
Master Law Regent: prereq Law Regent; allows full law RP collection.
And then the fourth way to do RP collection is by prestige class, but
that`s really complicated and a whole other topic.
p 96. The second paragraph says “there is a maximum to the amount of
regency that a character can collect per domain turn.” Is that just for
domain collection, or does it include vassalage RPs? If it doesn`t
include vassalage, the collection limit should be introduced the paragraph
before vassalage, and vassalage should be clearly stated to avoid the
limit.
Saying that the RP collection limit is twice the bloodline score is dumb,
and its an artifact of the needless change of bloodline to be an ability score. Bloodlines worked great as a number, theres no benefit to
changing them, and they introduce kludges like this into the system when
made 3d6 attributes. If it is made an attribute, domain collection should
be based on the straight score, which would make RPs somewhat more rare,
and get rid of the perceived need for the maximum RP reserve rule.
Speaking of which, the maximum RP reserve is a house rule which somehow
made it into the conversion. All these pet house rules of the BRCS team
which got tossed in here are starting to bug me, especially when they
don`t fix an obvious, pressing problem, like the trade route changes.
(Trade routes used to make guilders far and away the strongest regents,
providing both RP and GB for minimal entry cost. No other asset did
this, so that is a good change.)
Maximum RP reserve should be a variation, not the default rule.
–
Communication is possible only between equals.
Daniel McSorley- mcsorley@cis.ohio-state.edu
The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
Birthright-l Archives: http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.
