Elven armies

Dungeons & Dragons BRCS 3.0/3.5 Edition
1

Here is a new rule for elven realms. Every time an elven unit is raised, one population level is subtracted from the elven province it was raised from. The reverse holds true, every elven unit disbanded, raises the province level by one.

Pros: It is an attempt to capture the feel of the elves within the rules. Every elven life should be extremely precious. War should only be a last resort, not because of moral qualms or fears, but because the loss of elven life on the battlefield costs the elves their most scarce and precious resource.

Con: it is a very severe limitation on the elves. Someone could use this rule to move populations around. Raise units from several provinces, then disband into one. Could be useful for Tuarhievel should the guilds be developed.

Other: This also limits the elven military power that was greatly raised under the BRCS, because of their virtual guilds and the huge revenue increase derived from them.
Their is no neccesity, in my mind, to apply the same logic of exponentially increasing population, with higher province levels found in human realms. Elves are an alien race, and so can be treated as such. This also sets the remaining elven populations at a low level. In the thosands for most evlen realms. I like that feel, other might not.

2

I think the penalty it forces on elves is far to severe to make it a usable rule, unless you really hate elves. The fact that elven units are already twice as expensive as other races should be enough to reduce the power of elven realms. IMO elven nations only become a problem if you let their wizards run rampant. Some of those elves are fairly high level wizards.

On the matter of virtual guilds, this is an optional rule I believe, so if it is causing a problem of too much income, then don’t allow it. Of course, you could always only allow it for human wizards, as most elven lands don’t have guild holdings so why should they have virtual guilds?

3

I like this new elven feel.

My imagenation took me flying hig, reading this.

where the elven population levels are composed of pre-created units, with lodes of experiences and stuff. But to link them with the land, imovable elves.

so I have a elven provience level 3, it is composed of 3 experienced units. I mobolize thees units by paying the rasing fee, or spending rp. The provience drops down to lv0 temporarly, I would write it, lv 0 (3). The cultural infrastructure is still in plase even thow everyone worthy is off figthing, or hepling the figthing population, working ase page or begin part of the make up team. .. :slight_smile:

the provience is penalized until the units return and are alowed to settle.

the elves live long lifes and have a lot of experiences, so it would make sence thet thay have a lot of figthing experiences, working much better then other units.

If unit is killed off, the provience is penalized becous key figures are missing in the economy.

I would alow increased revenue from newly resetteld proviences, there is a lot more welth flowing around sins all the tribute from the rasing of units.

the unit is marked by the home provience it belongs to

if the player wisses to resettle the population in a nother proviance, then the economy structure must be created by a standard build action / rais provience level, but the dificulty will be easy. for part of the compoment the player is using is a unit of experienced population ready to resettle. if unsucsesfull, the unit will remain active and unsettled, but the cost of the action will be lost.

then the unit will gain a new home provience, but i would keep the old provience name on the unit as experience note. and if the player wants to put the population back to its old provience it sould be easy.

i would also like to add a new funtion, were the player can spend rp ot gp to influence a unit of elven population to doble its apperant economy activity. so it would count 2 proviences levels in stead of one temporary for x numer of months. giving off more revenues and increasing the active lv of the provience.

thees rules will not afect any holdings in the provience, so if i have law lv 3 in the provience it will not be reduced to 0 witch then I have to rase back up to 3 with rule action, it sould not be this way. but alternatively supressed only for revenues ofcours, but when the populaion returns, the same holdings and relations return.

.. :slight_smile:

4

I agree with Ian on this one.

If using the virtual guild (variant rule) elves still have in general less income than other domains.

They have no temples.

They have limited Law holdings (see the reference to non-lawful alignment for the race).

They trade only sparingly with other cultures (i.e., limited trade routes) - remember that a trade route must still connect two dissimilar privinces/cultures and be connected via a road or sea trade route. Well most elven provinces are too similar to be clasified as dissimilar and then the ones that are would still need a road “through human or demi-human” controlled territory, almost all of which are “enemies” to the elves - so how long would such a road/trade route be alllowed to exist?

Really elven provinces having so much GB that they can support vast armies is not really an issue.

5

why in the world would raising 200 elven archers reduce their population by as much as tens of thousands? (ie level 10 population, being taken down to 9, not that there are any 10 elven provinces, but just used to highlight the example) now I realize that a war camp can manytimes be 2 to 3 times the size of the army with entertainers, courts, merchants, and whores but … man somebody must hate elves.

6

The highest level elven province is 6, most are 2-3. Nothing even close to a 10, and so no need to consider that extreme. As I said in my post their is no need to assume that elven province numbers represent the same level of population numbers as in human provinces. It does become clunky with the higher level provinces, but they are very few. But it is no less clunky than raising a province from 5 to 6 in a season. Increasing the population by many thousands in 3 months.

I actually love elves, but would like to see their scarcity in mumbers captured in game mechanics. The elves are very few, and even the loss of a company of archers should be a loss.

This rule would hit them, but not as much as it would hit a human land, since the majority of elven income now comes from virtual guilds rather than as landed regents.

Because of virtual guilds, the income of elven regents has more than doubled from 2ed. That is huge, as they can now support more than twice the number of soldiers. When you mix that with their high bloodlines and high magical abilities they do become very powerful realms. This would weaken them, but not necesarily as much as they gained from 3ed. It also better also captures the spirit of a dying race which is being whittled down with every conflict.

7

Yes the surviving elven realms are fairly powerful, but if you don’t use the virtual guild variant rule (which I consider to be unbalanced for elven realms due to their 9th level source holdings) then they aren’t more powerful than a similar sized human realm.

If you look at the Sielwode. It brings in 36 GB/turn (assuming maxed out law holdings, less otherwise), with no temple holdings, trade routes, or guilds to increase that income.

It’s closest human neighbour, Elinie brings in 24 GB/turn from provinces and law holdings, but other regents in the provinces make a total of 26 GB/turn and there may be trade routes as well.

Elinie has a lower population (in terms of province levels) but makes up for it by having guilds and temples, so in if you compare the two, the elves don’t really overwhelm the human nation. Elven units also cost more. Ten units of elven archers, for example, would cost 40 GB to muster, 20 GB/turn to maintain as active, or 10 GB/turn to maintain as garrisoned. For 40 GB, Elinie could must 20 lesser units, or 10 units of elite infantry. I don’t consider elven archers to be the equivalent of elite infantry, or 2 human units. This gives the humans the advantage, and they can get the benefit of priest realm spells.

However, once you add virtual guilds into the equation eveything changes. The Sielwode gains an additional 30 GB of income. This unbalances everything which is why I consider that rule to be unbalanced. It works great for human regents who may only have 1-2 level 5-6 source holdings, but doesn’t work well for elves who don’t reduce the source levels of their lands and may have several level 9 source holdings.

8

I agree with you, without virtual guilds this would be a gross handicap. I’ve only played in campaigns where they have used that rule (that I knew of), and quite frankly forgot it was a variant.

9

Shouldn’t elves, or at least the remaining elven lands, have that advantage if only to survive? Diplomacy is going to work against them the moment they go on the offensive anyways, right? Heck, even with their bonus to Charisma, they have that racial penalty of -4 for diplomacy. So, fine, they have a nice, big elite army.

10

Wouldn’t it be better to use something like the rule from the original Book of Magecraft - a source of level 7+ gives a guild (0), and only for the purposes of establishing trade routes?

That would give the Elves the opportunity to get some additional resources, while removing their huge profits from the current virtual guilds.

11

Mainly because that would mean that you’d have to change the trade route rules in the BRCS. The new trade route rules means that the income is equal to 1/2 the level of the guild. 1/2 of a level 0 guild is still 0.

The virtual guilds variant rule was added in to replace that rule, and for most wizards it works quite well, just not for elves because of their high level source holdings (ever 9th level source is worth 3.3 GB).

Shouldn’t elves, or at least the remaining elven lands, have that advantage if only to survive? Diplomacy is going to work against them the moment they go on the offensive anyways, right? Heck, even with their bonus to Charisma, they have that racial penalty of -4 for diplomacy. So, fine, they have a nice, big elite army.

If you are running them as NPCs and keep them under control, then this isn’t so much of a problem. But if you let a PC run somewhere like the Sielwode, and give them the extra 30 GB from virtual guilds, then they could run amok very easily. It would like letting a PC run Avanil, Boeruine, or Ghoere, their incomes would be similar.

12

I think the variant was created to give some income to the many dirt poor mages throughout Anuire. Very few mages will get a serious income from this. It is only with the elves that this can get abusive.

13

But who says the elves should survive. They are a dying race afterwards, and this lack of numbers would then be better reflected within the rules. Even a just and well fought out major war could lead to their extinction. BUT they would have the resources and power, if smartly played, to avoid many conflicts and win minor or medium sized ones without any losses in elves.

14

I have no problem with the virtual guilds as they are I have yet to see an elven nation go on the rampage they are far to outnumbered by the humans. I also have no problem with the elves being more powerful than humans they are immortal and magical they should have some advantages.

15

I agree that the elves are a dying race and a mere reflection of their former glory and power. However they are slowly dieing out. If the rules that you suggest were to be implemented they would be wiped out in an instant. I think that the fact that they are dieing out would be better reflected in limitations on raising their province levels since it is mostly the negative birth rate that adversly affects their long term survivability. Their lack of number is accuratly represented in the increased cost of their units

Birthright is about having fun and while speculating on the best way to represent a fictional flaw on a fictional race in a fantasy strategy system can be fun we have to allow the game designers some leeway in order to make a balanced system. Nobody likes to be on the loosing side in battle and it would hinder the elven nations far too much

On the subject of Elven wizards and virtual guild holdings there is one refrence to an elf using source as a virtual guild holding (Havens of the great bay P35 under special consideration) and while I think that it is a powerful ability that must be strongly monitered by the DM and the game system I think Elven characters would be greatly disadvantaged if it were to be removed completely from their abilites.

The source to guild holding conversion -4 versus the original -7 from book of magecraft comes in my opinion almost entirely from looking too closely at Anuire. If we look at source levels in others places than anuire such as the Rjuric lands we see holding levels far in excess of what we see in the Anurian heartlands

Yes elves have more powerful sources or abilites than other wizards in anuire but we have to remember that elves do not have access to other powerful holdings such as Temple holdings and usually do not have Guild holdings to aid in the defense of a realm

16

I agree that the elves are a dying race and a mere reflection of their former glory and power. However they are slowly dieing out. If the rules that you suggest were to be implemented they would be wiped out in an instant. I think that the fact that they are dieing out would be better reflected in limitations on raising their province levels since it is mostly the negative birth rate that adversly affects their long term survivability. Their lack of number is accuratly represented in the increased cost of their units

I haven’t read any of the books or 2ed material, but from the BRCS it seems that the elves shrinking comes from losses in wars. They are immortal after all and immune from diseases, so a low birthrate would be enough to replace the losses from accidents. It is through wars that their population shrinks.

The elves would not be destroyed instantly in a war. If they were to launch an offensive war, into an area where they did not control the sources, they could face serious problems. But with their very high level wizards and highly skilled armies they are extremely powerful within their own realms.

One of the reasons I though of this rule was to lower their power, when using virtual guilds, so they could be a PC realm. I would like to play one of them but they do get out of hand, in terms of game balance not racial balance, with the income from virtual guilds. With my rule they would still be very powerful, though played cautiously if one were to care about long term strength of the realm.

17

The problem is that historically the elves have been at war with just about everyone. Goblins, Humans and Dwarves specifically.

So following your proposal they would have pretty much died out long ago, but we know that didn’t happen.

18

The Cerilian elves have throughout history been at war with almost everyrace they have encountered, Humans, Goblins, Dwarfs and other Elves with the exception being halflings (to the best of my knowledge at least) the Elven race in Cerilia is not very pacifistic, proud, aggressive and they are extremly conservative and most of them show an open distaste for all other races, considering them lesser races.

They have throughout their history enslaved both Dwarfs and Goblins and used them in forced labor.

There are three elven realms bordering the Gorgon the most powerful and aggressive of the Awenshag (Tuarhievel, Sielwoode and Lluabraight) and they are historicly one of the larger reason the Gorgon has been kept in “check” all these years. The Gorgon is an extremly talented strategist and has been battling elves for a large part of his life using numerous amounts of highly trained units of goblins, hobgoblins, humans and various other monster races. The Gorgon usually tests the defenses of his neighbours at least every ten years if not more frequently with major offenses occurring when he thinks these realms are offguard

It stands to reason that the losses in elven units and lives have been horrendous for these realms and if we were to implement the rules you suggest then the elven lands would have been depopulated every ten years or so

19

Having read throught htese 17 or so posts, my opinion remains pretty much what it was after reading Jonas’ original proposal: there’s no need for such a rule. While I understand the reasoning behind it (elven province levels, far more than humans or goblins, represent technology and per-capita power rather than sheer population), I think an accurately played BR campaign will balance the elves through cultural reality. They are few against many. While any one human or goblin nation attacking an elven nation is sheer suicide, the elves simply cannot afford an all-out war of aggression against any of their neighbors simply because they cannot afford the losses and potential repercussions of other neighboring realms hitting them while they’re weakened.

If there’s any variant rule to introduce to reflect this reality, it should be one that simply increases the difficulty (perhaps exponentially so) of ruling elven provinces to higher levels. The levy rules already cover what will happen if whole provinces are called to muster.

That being said, it does raise an interesting tangental point, one I’ve wrestled with in my own BR campaign: aren’t the mustering rules incredibly generous in terms of how many units per month or season can be mustered in any province? If you muster the maximum number of units season after season in the same province and start counting the total number of troops in all those companies (and then consider that most or al of these troops are some of the most able-bodied men of the province), how does this have no negative effect on provincial economies? Sending men off to war has ALWAYS had a real economic and domestic cost that goes well beyond the simple expenditures of equipping and training units.

I think a serious look should be taken at tempering the maximum rates of muster for military units…perhaps expanding limits to “per year” rather than “per season” maximums.

From this point of view, Jonas, I think elven realities of low birth rates and slow rates of maturation could then include a rule wherein the maximum rate of muster is much, much slower than for human and goblin realms. Talk about a great balancer…this would address the core issue that elves can’t afford the casulaties, and better reflect the Cerilian history of why elves have been losing the ongoing wars of attrition over the centuries…IMHO. :slight_smile:

Osprey

20

IMHO? I’ve never really gotten the feeling that you were very humble Jeremy :slight_smile:

I’ll concede the point. I still like my rule, but you all raised too many good points for why it is unworkable.