Urban Provinces

Dungeons & Dragons BRCS 3.0/3.5 Edition
1

I am aware there has been much discussion, and headaches, about the creation of urban provinces. However, a potential method that was developed by Osprey should be posted on this thread and I believe that by posting this now, it will motivate him to post the complete idea as he envisioned it.

I will give my understanding of the new idea as I recall it, first from a theoretical view and then the statistical view.

Looking to history to find major urban cities with populations over 100,000 don’t really offer so many examples until the industrial revolution. As we’re more in the medieval era its very rare, maybe Constantinople would be an example. Nevertheless, in Birthright as we have the Imperial City as an amazing example of an urban province, the possibility of following their example to create an urban province seems like it should be possible. However, it also should be very difficult, otherwise we would see more of them or even remains of them from the Old Empire.

To solve this Osprey had a good idea to not only include this difficulty, but to also include the past difficulty with sudden population changes that plagued past ideas. Instead of just splitting the levels of the rural province with the urban province and the population inconsistency and headache that causes, rather, the rural province is built up above its maximum potential level in virtual levels. These virtual levels would then be split between the rural and urban province. As I understood it these virtual levels would be similar to the building costs to creating the urban province. Heh, that’s about as much theory as I recall atm, so I’ll let Osprey expand upon and explain his idea more himself J

As for the statistics I recall that there are essentially 5 rules concerning the creation of the urban province.

  1. The rural province must be of level 9 (for capitals because they can count for 1 level higher population as discussed in the new D20 BRCS rules p88) or level 10 (for other rural provinces)

  2. There can only be one urban province based in a rural province. (Maybe just one per realm. Not fully discussed)

  3. The rural province must be ruled up to half of the current level of the province in virtual levels. So for both capitals and normal provinces 5 virtual levels will have to be raised. Hence, they will have to raise up their province to level 14 and 15 respectively. These virtual levels will count to the DC and cost of ruling up a province, however, they will not count for collection of regency and GBs. Nor would they allow holdings to be ruled up to higher levels.

  4. Once the rural province has be ruled up to 14 or 15 the ruler may then use the create province domain action to form the urban province. Now the levels of the rural province and the urban province can vary, slightly, so players can have some leeway in deciding how balanced they want the split. So they can split the levels to 7(rural)-7(urban) or 6-8 for capitals and 7-8 or 6-9 for other provinces. This would keep the population levels fairly equivalent for provinces of level 9 and 10.

  5. Those holdings (law, temple and guild) in the province will each be split up between the two provinces leaving the majority of levels for a holding in the urban province. Roughly 2/3 of the holdings should be in the urban province. So a level 10 guild holding would be split up into 4(rural)-6(urban) with a level 4 guild holding in the rural province and a level 6 guild holding in the urban.

I believe these are the major rules he discussed, if I’m missing some or got a couple wrong I’m sure he’ll add or correct them.

2

Just a few clarifications:

  1. The province must first be ruled to its maximum level before it is eligible to become an urban province.

Thus, a L9 capital would qualify as [hills, caostal] or [open, river], while a L10 could be reached only as [open, coastal].

Clarifying #2: An urban province needs at least one its trade routes to be from an adjacent rural province (typically the “parent” province). This represents an agricultural source of food for the city.

  1. These levels are created using the Rule Province action. Once per season limit applies as usual.
3

Why create these virtual level and then use create province. It just isn’t very fluid. The city as a political and economic unit would appear in one month. A regent that controlled all the holdings of one type within the province would suddenly control only a portion of the holdings in the rural province. Why not use the create province action and then rule up the city at a base DC of 20 and an additional 10 GB per rule? To allow for a more even population spread the regent could switch a couple of province levels over to the newly created citys, along with the appropriate holdings.

4

Check out the thread “Elven Forests and Source Potential” in the Royal Library. About 6 posts into it, a discussion about creating urban provinces begins, and it details some of the problems with simply “splitting off” urban provinces.

The general idea in this system is that they should be hard as hell to make (hence the reason there’s only one in all of Cerilia, and it was made at the height of the Empire). I imagine the virtual levels equal growing population and investment that eventually reach a “critical mass” and become a seperate province. I know, it’s far from a brilliant solution, but if anyone can work out a smoother one (that’s cohesive, balanced, etc.), I’d love to see it. 'Cause if it’s been done once, it could be done again. And the historical evolution of our world says that such places ARE possible, but extremely rare until the birth of the Industrial Revolution. Yet ancient Rome, Constantinople, and perhaps others (Alexandria? Carthage?) provide some historical examples of the possiblity without such a revolution. So if your Cerilian campaign is evolving into a higher level of civilization (i.e., level 9-10 provinces), it should be possible, yet represent a very big step forward in that evolution.

That’s the thinking behind it, anyways.

5

Many cities grew to well over 100,000 in population before the industrial revelution. London, paris, colone, rome, constatinople, madrid, lisbon, barsalona, andualsia, babylon, niniva, venis, alexandra, and these are just a few of the cities that reached over 100,000 population in europe and teh middle east. These cities reached over 100,000 population during teh anchient and midevil peroids and many more cities reached over 100,000 pops in the reinisance. The real limiting factor for pop wasnt 100,000 that is realtively easy to reach its 1,000,000 that is teh population level that requires teh industrial revelution to reach but even then rome and costatinople and the anchient city of the aztechs (current location of mexico city) all reached over 1,000,000 in pops at their height. I havent even go into asia cities the reached over 100,000 in pop in india, china or south east asia. Mesoamerica also had many cities over 100,000 population. So history shows that 100,000 pop isnt rare at all.

The fact that there is only one in cerlilia is more likely because of the constant wars (a great population limiter) and the relationship between the the source and population. Perhaps while humans are less aware or intune with nature understand at some level that they cant completely conquer nature less they lose total conection with nature and teh sourse so they subconciously limit their population growth.

I dont know but its not difficult for anchient cities to reach 100,000 population. Hell it was teh 13th century plague that depopulated europe not the lack of technological ability to support high population cities.

This is just food for thought. Creating urban provinces could create a negative effect on rural provinces that creates a -1 sorces level or all surounding provinces to teh home province of teh urban province might be another way to reduce the creation of urban provinces and say after an X time period has passed that the home and surounding provinces recover or adjust to teh urban province so that the sorce penalty is removed. perhaps a 10 year or 25 year time period is in lines of this concept. Perhaps this idea it totally outside teh spirit of the rules.

i just wanted to point out that 100,00 population sized cities are not all that uncommon.

6

----- Original Message -----

From: “Airgedok” <brnetboard@BIRTHRIGHT.NET>

Sent: Sunday, October 12, 2003 12:50 AM

> Many cities grew to well over 100,000 in population before the

industrial revelution. London, paris, colone, rome, constatinople, madrid,

lisbon, barsalona, andualsia, babylon, niniva, venis, alexandra, and these

are just a few of the cities that reached over 100,000 population in europe

and teh middle east. These cities reached over 100,000 population during teh

anchient and midevil peroids and many more >cities reached over 100,000 pops

in the reinisance.

My list of Rennaisance cities numbering 100,000 is London, Paris, Amsterdam,

Lisbon, Milan, Venice, Rome, Naples, Messina, Palermo, and Constantinople.

By the 18th century you may add Madrid and Moscow, but must remove Messina.

Considering populations over many thousands of years is not a good

indication of how many cities should be numbering over 100,000 during the

course of a game. Of the map of Cerilia, only Anuire, Brectuer, and Khinasi

are of in the possition to consdier such cities. France had one. England

had one. Iberia had one. The Empire had one, and it wasn`t German, its

Dutch. Of all Europe East of Amsterdam and North Venice there were no such

cities until Moscow made the list. Of such cities they play the role of

national center, being the capital go government, finance, trade, and

culture. Since the realms of Cerilia lack such a central capital for all of

these functions, I have a hard time imagining such a city being able to come

into being. It is the very nature in all of the nations of Cerilia that

there are many small competing centers, not one dominant place where the

government, finance, trade, and culture of Brecture (for example) are all

conducted.

Kenneth Gauck

kgauck@mchsi.com

7

This is just food for thought. Creating urban provinces could create a negative effect on rural provinces that creates a -1 sorces level or all surounding provinces to teh home province of teh urban province might be another way to reduce the creation of urban provinces and say after an X time period has passed that the home and surounding provinces recover or adjust to teh urban province so that the sorce penalty is removed. perhaps a 10 year or 25 year time period is in lines of this concept. Perhaps this idea it totally outside teh spirit of the rules.

Actually, I think such an idea has merit. Having urban provinces reduce the surrounding source levels isn’t out of the spirit of the game at all. Cities always spread their “blights” on the natural world in a fairly large radius. Intense agriculture, and the villages and small towns that eventually grow up with them, would definitely reduce the source potential in the area. But I doubt the mebhaighal would ever “adjust” to such a degree of civilization, unless you believe that mebhaighal can coexist with urban civilization (which definitely does not agree with the original concept).

8

Originally posted by Osprey@Oct 12 2003, 02:02 PM
[b] [quote]This is just food for thought. Creating urban provinces could create a negative effect on rural provinces that creates a -1 sorces level or all surounding provinces to teh home province of teh urban province might be another way to reduce the creation of urban provinces and say after an X time period has passed that the home and surounding provinces recover or adjust to teh urban province so that the sorce penalty is removed. perhaps a 10 year or 25 year time period is in lines of this concept. Perhaps this idea it totally outside teh spirit of the rules.

Actually, I think such an idea has merit. Having urban provinces reduce the surrounding source levels isn’t out of the spirit of the game at all. Cities always spread their “blights” on the natural world in a fairly large radius. Intense agriculture, and the villages and small towns that eventually grow up with them, would definitely reduce the source potential in the area. But I doubt the mebhaighal would ever “adjust” to such a degree of civilization, unless you believe that mebhaighal can coexist with urban civilization (which definitely does not agree with the original concept). [/b][/quote]
The reason for the adjustment was that the current rules for the imperial city dont create this “blight” to the surrounding areas. So why have new cities have a perma blight effect? The land only “adjusts” back in teh surounding area and the spirit of teh rules is that the effects on the source are limited to the area of the damage. The urban province would still have a 0 source and from my understanding so would teh host province correct? So the surounding provinces are only limitedly effected for a limited time.

Also urban blight as we know it is not really a problem in older cities in teh 100,000 pop range. Its really teh advent of teh automoblie that creates the urban blight we know of today. I simply tried to present a “reason” why only one urban province ever formed. But when I think on it its a poor limating factor. Since most regents dont own source holdings and most landed regents would desire the huge gains from an urban province in both GB and RP over the lose of source holdings, this would be non-factor in teh equation. Regents would try to create urban provinces simply because of teh power city centres create. Great places to provide a kingdom with artisans and a place to muster troops. Its urban centres that provide the powerbase for a kingdom.

So my thoughts are flawed and wrong.

9

I`ve made this argument several times in the past, but since the subject has

come up I`ll mention it again: I think the solution to the “city province”

issue in the BR domain rules is better handled by just allowing for level

11+ provinces (both in terms of their population levels and potential

sources) rather than a domain action that “splits” a province into two

independant populations. The domain system assumes up to and including

level 10 that urban areas are incorporated into the overall population level

of the province, that the governing bodies of local urban areas are part of

the overall province structure, and that province rulers control both rural

and urban areas as a whole, so why stop at level 10 for either aspect of

provinces? The “max level” of population is more a reflection of certain

“old style” D&D methods regarding such things, and needn`t really even have

been applied then. It was, essentially, a mistake based on some short term

thinking about the game mechanics. Dont get me wrong, its not an

unforgiveable or inexplicable mistake–BR being the first substantial foray

into a domain level of play in D&D, but in the long run doing away with the

level 10 cap makes more sense.

The existence of the Imperial City “province” does throw a bit of a monkey

wrench in the works for anyone who is an absolute purist regarding the

original materials, but it makes as much sense to incorporate that

“province” into the adjacent one and just give the Chamberlain control over

that rather than to have a sort of quasi-province of extraordinary size (in

comparison to the other BR provinces) clinging to the coast of Anuire, like

Rome dangling off the tip of the Italian boot.

Having a seperated, urban province leads to several difficult issues in a

system of domain rules, not the least of which is the “net gain” or "net

loss" of population that results from any split of an existing population

level given the scaled population levels of the domain rules. A level 10

broken up into two level 5 provinces winds up displacing 50,000 civilians,

while a more accurate accounting of the population figures turns a level 10

province into to level 7`s for a net gain of 4 total province levels.

Either way makes for a game mechanical problem. In fact, there`s no real

necessity to split a province up like that. Level 11+ provinces can just

continue to be ruled up with a few more lines to the various tables for

revenue. Level 11+ population levels are easily projected using a simple

formula; population level (squared) x 1,000 rounded to the nearest 5,000.

11=120,000

12=145,000

13=170,000

14=195,000

15=225,000

Etc.

Lastly, there is IMO a bit of an issue with the justification for an

independent urban province that is divorced from any nearby territory the

way it is presented by the concept in either the original BR materials or in

any of the proposed methods for creating such provinces. I do like the idea

of breaking up political units into various sizes–the polis, townships,

villages, military territories, etc.–but at the level of the BR domain

system it`s easier to just do away with the level cap than try to deal with

such concepts using a “split province” set of rules.

Gary

10

[b]Lastly, there is IMO a bit of an issue with the justification for an
independent urban province that is divorced from any nearby territory the
way it is presented by the concept in either the original BR materials or in
any of the proposed methods for creating such provinces. I do like the idea
of breaking up political units into various sizes–the polis, townships,
villages, military territories, etc.–but at the level of the BR domain
system it`s easier to just do away with the level cap than try to deal with
such concepts using a “split province” set of rules.

Gary
[/b]

Actually, BRCS added in that an urban province needs at least one active trade route or it drops in level. I took it a step further and said that this must be to an open (read: agricultural) province to represent the food supplies necessary to feed the population of the big city. One could easily take this even further, and say that one such trade route is necessary per x levels of urban province (off the top of my head, I’d say 1:5 is reasonable, so urban prov. L1-5= 1 ag. trade route, L6-10 needs 2 such routes). Optionally, given non-linear populations, we could reason L1-6: 1 route, L7-9: 2 routes, L10: 3 routes. On the other hand, it’s hard to imagine an urban province being anything less than level 7, so generally at least 2 food-supplying trade routes would be needed to supply the city (and I allow 4 trade routes to a L10 province, so that should be accounted for in my suggestion). On the other hand, I imagine many craftsmen and laborers producing finished goods of all sorts and sizes, and these finished goods would be the exports flowing back to the agricultural provinces. The other trade route(s) would supply raw materials for these craftsmen.

Similarly, when it seems that most urban provinces split from open provinces, it seems logical that one of those trade routes would be from the parent province. Moreover, some (if not all) trade routes to the urban prov. would run through the parent province, which creates a very strong relationship between the two. This is alluded to in RoE when the provinces of Ciliene and Avanil are discussed in relation to the Imperial City. It talks about the power that Darien Avan and Hierl Diem hold over the City of Anuire because they could cut off the (land-based) trade routes to the city at any time.

If an urban province were to be made during the course of a campaign, it would almost certainly be a unique event within a given realm, and most of the time I’d expect it to be the capital of that realm. This already speaks volumes about its relationship to the realm.

I’d expect the original province (clear terrain, usually) to be a mixture of intense agricultural production (with many fields and villages) and things like inns, warehouses, and traders capitalizing on the ever-growing needs of an expanding metropolis.

I actually like the idea of a population cap for one main reason: provinces are built as self-sufficient entities, whereas the urban province is dependant on imports to supply its massive population, especially foodstuffs. Sure, there might be gardens in the city, but never enough to supply a serious quantity of food. The provincle level maximums represent, IMO, the maximum population that a province can support from its own food production. There’s also a certain space limitation in dense/rugged terrain types, but cities can concentrate an amazing number of people in a relatively small space, so I don’t think this is the major issue here.

If you were to use the idea of higher province levels (which might very well be the best solution), then I’d integrate a similar import-dependent rule for levels above the normal maximums based on terrain types. What do you think of that, Geeman?

11

At 11:21 PM 10/13/2003 +0200, Osprey wrote:

>If you were to use the idea of higher province levels (which might very

>well be the best solution), then I`d integrate a similar import-dependent

rule for levels above the normal maximums based on terrain types. What do

you think of that, Geeman?

I like the effect of trade routes on population level. I`ve used them as

one of the modifiers in determining a province`s max pop in the past along

with various terrain, tech level and a few kinds of public works (handled

similar to monuments) like aqueducts, baths, sewers, etc. In that context

one still doesn`t really need to have a separate “city” province of the

Imperial City type if one uses 11+ population levels.

Gary

12

Im not sure what to say realy.
exept to point out some examples from history.

personaly I would like to have smaller citys then one of 100.000
for thet is like the 1/3 of the country I live in.

what are the reacons for people to settle in citys.

  1. the administration is based there, and in order to run a fluen lobby group you need some people there.

  2. Were are all the wariors to live, and keep there familys. a vise king will build a fort for the familys of his knigths and chavalry men in order to have them more happy aout leaving for battle. Thay feel thet there family is save.

  3. A place were the traveler will find all his needs, like craftsmen and service.

Like st. Petersburg

peter the graid past a order tet a city sould be build by the sea. were all the craftsmen and tradesmen of the nabouring domains would settle (or face his raith). So he and his men could find all the service thay would need in one place, and not needing to travel all around few domains in order to find what thay needed.

…

I would like to have a variand rule awailable were small citys could be formed, and even starved out. burned, and so forth.

Not all citys need to be large. in order to function wery well.

…
then again to create a large city I would personaly like to have more then one entry for a large city, diveded by nabourhoods, a large city could even span across domain borders, rivers. there could even be large walls dividing the city into fortifyed parts, so when one part would fall, the others would remain.

Like berlin in hte cold war. Divided in 2 parts by a Wall. Or like jerusalem to day :slight_smile: when the unwanted live on the other side.

Sone one large city would be maid out of many smaller ones. So tecnicaly it would be a maijor pain raisong the hell yout of a city.

Bottom line begin: I think it would describe the complexity of a city much better.

13

Originally posted by Osprey@Oct 13 2003, 10:21 PM

I actually like the idea of a population cap for one main reason: provinces are built as self-sufficient entities, whereas the urban province is dependant on imports to supply its massive population, especially foodstuffs. Sure, there might be gardens in the city, but never enough to supply a serious quantity of food. The provincle level maximums represent, IMO, the maximum population that a province can support from its own food production.

Major food imports into cities during the middle ages almost always came from surrounding agricultural areas. A province growing above 10 could require an internal trade route, between the rural and urban area. The income would be half the province level, same as a sea trade route to “parts unknown”. A higher level province, say 16, might require two internal trade routes. If that vital trade route was cut, the province would drop by one level each month or season.

14

Major food imports into cities during the middle ages almost always came from surrounding agricultural areas. A province growing above 10 could require an internal trade route, between the rural and urban area. The income would be half the province level, same as a sea trade route to “parts unknown”. A higher level province, say 16, might require two internal trade routes. If that vital trade route was cut, the province would drop by one level each month or season.

With the current trade route rules, I don’t see any reason such a route wouldn’t earn its full value in GB (in this case, equal to the guild level). “Parts unknown” really represents a foreign guilder holding the foreign half of a trade route. But here there’s no reason an agricultural support route wouldn’t also include exports of finished goods to the country folk.

This is one aspect where having a seperate urban province really does simplify things - an urban province is a different terrain type from any other terrain, and so could have trade routes with adjacent open provinces.

Internal routes are problematic because they introduce an abberration of the standard rules that opens up a whole can of worms.

In this case I think it would be better to assume that any growth beyond the normal max. levels requires food beyond what the local province can support, because that growth would be focused on the central city in the province, and the locals are already providing what they can to support that.

15

[b]I like the effect of trade routes on population level. Ive used them as one of the modifiers in determining a provinces max pop in the past along
with various terrain, tech level and a few kinds of public works (handled
similar to monuments) like aqueducts, baths, sewers, etc. In that context
one still doesn`t really need to have a separate “city” province of the
Imperial City type if one uses 11+ population levels.

Gary
[/b]

Hey Gary, would you mind posting some of your rules and statistics on those public works? i.e., their costs, effects, maintenance, etc.? I’m really curious to see how you work that - it sounds neat.

16

At 04:18 PM 10/19/2003 +0200, Osprey wrote:

> Internal routes are problematic because they introduce an abberration of

> the standard rules that opens up a whole can of worms.

I think “internal trade routes” are pretty much what is meant by a guild

holding. That is, it isn`t generally the manufacture, warehousing and

marketing of goods that a guilder controls, but the actual internal trade

of them that he controls. Even to that extent that the guilder may

actually own the means of production, “internal trade” is still something

best represented as part of the guild levels itself.

Gary

17

At 04:20 PM 10/19/2003 +0200, Osprey wrote:

>Hey Gary, would you mind posting some of your rules and statistics on

>those public works? i.e., their costs, effects, maintenance, etc.? I`m

really curious to see how you work that - it sounds neat.

It`s part of a much larger rewrite of the Build action, and to be honest

its not all in a very nice, postable format right now, so tell ya

what. Give me a few days and I`ll put some work into it and post it in a

more complete format. This week might be a bit busy, and I`ve got some

other things I`d like to get posted (new awnsheghlien and ersheghlien keep

popping into my head) but I`ll bump this up on my list of things to do.

In the meantime, here`s the basic idea: When using the Build action one

creates structures that one assigns a numerical value to much like

holdings. They don`t have the same effects has holdings, of course, just a

number that has some function at the domain level–the way the original

rules dealt with castles. In the same way one can construct a castle(3)

one can also have roads(2) or a palace(4) in a province. Castles and

palaces have the same effects outlined in the RB while roads reduce travel

time and allow for greater trade. Other types of construction have

different effects. Essentially, anything that isn`t a holding or a

province can be described in this manner; barracks, bridges, colleges,

shipyards, etc. Barracks allow for the reduced maintenance of companies,

bridges allow a certain number of units to cross a river or other

obstruction in a war move, colleges and shipyards allow for a reduced cost

in mustering companies or building ships, etc. If one can come up with a

domain level effect that isn`t handled by provinces and holdings then it

can probably be built using the Build action.

Each structure is to a certain extent an abstract rating of an overall

effort. That is, a castle is generally assumed to be a single, centralized

structure but it could as easily represent a system of towers on the border

of a province, the effects of an underground population, etc. Similarly

other structures can be described as a general emphasis rather than a

particular building. A utility structure, therefore, is an effort to

increase the living conditions of a province which, in turn, allows for a

greater population density. Baths, aqueducts, sewers, etc. are

infrastructure that allow more people to live in the same area. A utility

structure is something that adds to the overall maximum population level of

a province on a 1:1 basis. If the normal population level of the province

is 6 then a utility(2) will make it 8.

Gary

18

It is very possible i missed something reading this long thread but i heard several valid points and i’ll mix and match with a bit extra…

What if you were to allow the provinces to go above thier normal maximums by having a trade to an area that has enough untainted mehgibal to support the added population? Thus representing the shift of resource (natural in this case) nessisary to support the add ppls…

ideas all yours now… feel free to tear it apart…

19

yeah, after considering the urban province for some time, and trying to find ways to implement it, we just settled upon finding ways to raise the normal province level instead, you can see the way that we determined this in our house rules here: Soutehrn Alliance basically, there has to be wonders to raise the province level above its normal limit.

20

Here is an alternate idea that I have been throwing around for building an Urban Province. The one key thing I see with an Urban Province is that is becomes a beacon of the nation that built it. It embodies the core ideals of the regent and his realm. Also the regent building must be well experieced and powerful.

First you have to build 10 lvl’s of the Urban Province wonder.(25 GB/lvl)
It must be built in a lvl 10 province.
Also the regent building the UP must have at least 30 provinces under his control.
No more than 1 lvl per season may be built.
After construction the Regent spends a season creating the province.
First month they make an agitate action to get people interested and excited about the project.
Second month is a Diplomacy action to build a trade route from the home province for food for the city.
Third month is an Administrate action to finalize all the paperwork and beauracracy of the new province

This creates a 10 lvl Urban Province that is invested by the regent builder. This opens 10 lvs of guild, law, and temple.

I would love some feed back on this.