Brcs Chap 2 Update

[irdeggman]

As promised is a (very) brief summary of what I’m working for changes to Chap 2 for the revision:

Based on the poll results, the 2 most favored proposals were proposal A (revision of the BRCS-playtest) and proposal D (feat like approach) with the other 2 proposals trailing pretty far behind. Even though the polls indicated a slight preference for the feat-like approach I’m inverting the order and making the proposal A version the default one. This is because the feat-like approach can mostly be done with a table and a paragraph while the other one takes a little more writing. It is taking me a while to capture the feat-like approach.

Rewriting the bloodscore to match the proposal A version, mostly. This decision was based on the other poll in which people basically said they wanted a variant to allow both random and non-random methods of bloodline score generation. When the Birthright.net was last revised the display of this poll’s results seemed to have been hidden or lost, but it was pretty much the following – 7 – random only, 5 – non-random only and 4 - variant for both, so the only way to really interpret this set of results is that both random and non-random methods should be addressed.

It is being proposed to generate a 7th score at character creation, for those wishing to start as a scion. This accounts for the non-random method variant. The initial ability score is then doubled, so it is no longer an ability. This was done due the interest in maintaining consistency with the 2nd ed bloodline scores for NPCs. I’m going to add a variant to allow all characters to roll 7 abilities and then non-blooded can keep the best 6 for their standard ability scores. This will allow DMs to have something closer to the 10% exp bonus that non-blooded characters received in 2nd ed, but not make it the standard.

I’m eliminating the scion templates and going with scion class levels. This is more conducive to allowing ECL’d characters to start in a 1st level campaign. I’m basically taking the scion classes from proposal D and tweaking them some.

I’m inserting words to reflect that this system was designed for a balanced campaign, that is one which is both domain-level and adventure-level based. I’m working on some kind of variant to account for how to modify the scion class levels to account for campaigns that are domain-level or adventure-level based exclusively, where they don’t translate as well.

I’m adding a variant to allow use of Charisma modifier instead of the bloodline score modifier for DC of blood abilities. A lot of people expressed an interest/desire for one.

Changing how blood abilities are handled by stating that unless otherwise specified the blood abilities are spell-like instead of they are always spell-like. Adding some other types to the existing blood abilities, very few though. Things like Alertness and Blood Mark are examples of things that will be listed as different. For example Alertness will be an extra-ordinary ability and Blood Mark will provide a circumstance bonus vice a Spell-like ability. The reasoning for the circumstance bonus is that in order to gain the bonus the “viewer” must perceive the blood mark in order to be affected and it basically involves some sort of interaction.

Changing some of the blood abilities (examples but not all inclusive):

Alertness – rewriting, since the previous version was the same as the feat and blood abilities should be slightly more powerful than feats.

Elemental Control – rewriting to change to Summon Monster V vice III. This allows a medium elemental vice a small one. A medium elemental still doesn’t gain any DR, so it is not too powerful.

Endurance – removed it from the list of blood abilities. It wasn’t in the original rules. Put it as an example of a DM created new blood ability.


I don't have a good estimate for how long this will take, but I definitely will meet the January commitment that Ian has made.

[Osprey]

Question: If the Bloodline attribute is doubled to make a bloodline score, what now is the RP reserve limit (compared to 5 x the Bloodline ability score in BRCS)? Is there any limit at all?


Elemental Control – rewriting to change to Summon Monster V vice III. This allows a medium elemental vice a small one. A medium elemental still doesn’t gain any DR, so it is not too powerful.


Good call. I already made this change in my own game, glad to see it being revised. :)

Perhaps the constant powers should be Supernatural rather than Extraordinary, as all blood powers have a divine energy basis. For example, Resistance, Enhanced Senses, Alertness. This way the powers can't be dispelled, but they can be suppressed in anti-magic zones. Just a thought...

[irdeggman]

Originally posted by Osprey@Oct 13 2003, 11:18 AM
Question: If the Bloodline attribute is doubled to make a bloodline score, what now is the RP reserve limit (compared to 5 x the Bloodline ability score in BRCS)? Is there any limit at all?


The reserve RP limit is 2 X blood score with an automatic increase in blood score when maintained at the level needed (present blood score plus one - the same as the 2nd ed number) for 2 consecutive domain turns.

[Osprey]

The reserve RP limit is 2 X blood score with an automatic increase in blood score when maintained at the level needed (present blood score plus one - the same as the 2nd ed number) for 2 consecutive domain turns.

Is that really the way bloodline was raised in 2e BR? I don't have the books handy at the moment, but I didn't remember it being quite like that.

So a regent with a bloodline score of 40 needs at least 41 RP for 2 seasons in a row, and then his bloodline score increases? Do they then lose 41 RP when the score goes up?

That doesna't quite add up somehow...

[Green Knight]

In 2E you paid RP = new bloodline score (only 1 point increase at a

time). Limit once per turn.



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

From: Birthright Roleplaying Game Discussion

[mailto:BIRTHRIGHT-L@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM] On Behalf Of Osprey

Sent: 13. oktober 2003 22:58

To: BIRTHRIGHT-L@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM

Subject: Re: Brcs Chap 2 Update [36#2012]



This post was generated by the Birthright.net message forum.

You can view the entire thread at:

http://www.birthright.net/forums/index.php?act=ST&f=36&t=2012



Osprey wrote:


The reserve RP limit is 2 X blood score with an automatic

increase in blood score when maintained at the level needed (present

blood score plus one - the same as the 2nd ed number) for 2 consecutive

domain turns.



Is that really the way bloodline was raised in 2e BR? I don`t have the

books handy at the moment, but I didn`t remember it being quite like

that.



So a regent with a bloodline score of 40 needs at least 41 RP for 2

seasons in a row, and then his bloodline score increases? Do they then

lose 41 RP when the score goes up?



That doesna`t quite add up somehow...



************************************************** **********************

****



Birthright-l Archives:

http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html

[Osprey]

In 2E you paid RP = new bloodline score (only 1 point increase at a
time). Limit once per turn.


Ah, that sounds right. Quite a different system than Irdeggman's proposed system, though.

So Duane, you're proposing this variant as a way to slow down the increase of bloodline scores?

It still sounds like it needs a few kinks ironed out, IMO.

[irdeggman]

Originally posted by Osprey@Oct 13 2003, 04:41 PM

In 2E you paid RP = new bloodline score (only 1 point increase at a
time). Limit once per turn.


Ah, that sounds right. Quite a different system than Irdeggman's proposed system, though.

So Duane, you're proposing this variant as a way to slow down the increase of bloodline scores?

It still sounds like it needs a few kinks ironed out, IMO.
Well, the system was basically that in the BRCS-playtest but has been modified to reflect the new bloodscore range. In 2nd ed it also required a domain action to raise your blood score, using the automatic raising after 2 consecutive seasons frees up this action. Making it an automatic action was the reason for the trade off of only twice a year. The reasoning for maintaining the reserve for two consecutive seasons was to reflect a sort of biological accumulation or reflecting that the body of the scion has to get used to this new level of power before really being able to access it properly.

The proposed reserve limit (as was done in the BRCS-playtest) was basically to keep regents from maintaining large amounts of RP reserves, something that could easily be done since domain actions are now GB based vice RP based, that is to say it requires GB in order to attempt a domain action, but RP can still be spent to modify it.

The placement of the ( ) in my previous reply was supposed to refer to the present score +1 RP cost to raise blood line score, and not the entire sentence. Sorry for the confusion and yes the regent loses the RP equivalent of his new score in the process.

Here's the text (so far):

A scion may increase his bloodline ability score via usurpation, described later in this chapter. Another method of increasing his bloodline score is through a ceremony of Investiture, described later in this book.
The remaining method of a scion increasing his bloodline score is through wise rulership. A scion’s bloodline score can be permanently increased by one point by spending a number of RP equal to the character’s target bloodline score, i.e., his current bloodline score plus one. This increase occurs automatically when a scion’s regency reserve exceeds the amount necessary for the increase for two successive domain turns (six months). Such an increase is uncommon (many characters will never realize an increase in bloodline strength). A scion's bloodline cannot increase more than two points per year. A character's bloodline score may decrease if they are forced (or choose to) spend regency points exceeding the points in their current regency reserve. If a scion spends RP beyond their reserve, their bloodline score is permanently reduced by one point. This reduction, however, provides RP equal to the character's previous bloodline score. This process continues as necessary to pay the required RP debt

[Osprey]

A scion's bloodline cannot increase more than two points per year.

That used to read (in BRCS), 'A scion's bloodline score cannot increase more than two points per year by this method.' [paraphrased from memory]

That allowed increase through usurpation. The point is that increasing bloodline through usurpation should be unlimited, IMO (it's the quick and dirty way, and the risky way, to raise one's bloodline), whereas raising it through RP expenditure should be limited.

Another point: compared to BRCS, the RP reserve limit has now decreased by 20% (I think?). Is this balanced, compared to original rules? I mean, I understand your point based on replacing RP with GB costs, but the required RP costs weren't all that large if I remember rightly. What you're presenting is a much stricter limit on RP reserves. Perhaps 3x bloodline score would be more in keeping with the spirit of the original rules?

Comparing to BRCS bloodline score, it was 5x current score, now it's 4x current score. With the RP raise requirements, maxed. out regents are now likely to lose RP if they want to raise their bloodline scores, at least if they don't spend RP for 2 seasons.

Also, little editing note: perhaps include page number references when referring to Usurpation and Investiture (once the page numbers are set, of course). :)

[irdeggman]

Originally posted by Osprey@Oct 14 2003, 10:10 AM

A scion's bloodline cannot increase more than two points per year.

That used to read (in BRCS), 'A scion's bloodline score cannot increase more than two points per year by this method.' [paraphrased from memory]

That allowed increase through usurpation. The point is that increasing bloodline through usurpation should be unlimited, IMO (it's the quick and dirty way, and the risky way, to raise one's bloodline), whereas raising it through RP expenditure should be limited.

Another point: compared to BRCS, the RP reserve limit has now decreased by 20% (I think?). Is this balanced, compared to original rules? I mean, I understand your point based on replacing RP with GB costs, but the required RP costs weren't all that large if I remember rightly. What you're presenting is a much stricter limit on RP reserves. Perhaps 3x bloodline score would be more in keeping with the spirit of the original rules?

Comparing to BRCS bloodline score, it was 5x current score, now it's 4x current score. With the RP raise requirements, maxed. out regents are now likely to lose RP if they want to raise their bloodline scores, at least if they don't spend RP for 2 seasons.

Also, little editing note: perhaps include page number references when referring to Usurpation and Investiture (once the page numbers are set, of course). :)
Nope, it read "A scion's bloodline cannot increase more than two points per year." in the playtest document.

You gave a good point about not including usurpation (and investiture) in this limit - even though everyone seemed to miss that in the playtest document.

As far as the 2X versus the older 5X (from the playtest) I tried to find a multiplier that was easy to use, X3 yielding what I thought was far too great a number. Raising bloodscore would not deplete the regent. For example a regent with a blood score of 30 wants to raise his blood score to 31. Let's say he gains 28 RP per season from holding and the like. He needs to maintain a 31 RP balance for two consecutive seasons, which means that after the first season (it would require at least a season to build up a bank to build from) let's say he banked half his RP gains so at the start of the 2nd season he has 14 +28 = 42 RP in his bank. He can spend 11 RP during that season and not have to lower his reserve below the minimal amount. The next season he gains another 2, so if he spent the 11 and only carried over 31 he would start that season with 31 + 28 = 59 RP of which the regent could spend all 28 gained that season. At the end of that season the regent's bloodscore would increase to 31 so he would start the next season being able to collect 31 RP per season instead of 28.

It is not supposed to be easy to raise a regent's blood score. The usurpation rules of the BRCS - playtest made it much easier to gain from killing a scion than the old 2nd ed rules did.

In all the campaigns I've run and played in (about 5 different versions) no player had ever been able to raise his PC's bloodscore via wise rule. If they had the RP (which most did after a while) they couldn't afford to take a domain action to accomplish it. They usually had more pressing matters to be concerned with.

[destowe]

I thought it cost X4 the current bloodline score to raise the ability.

For a regent with a bloodscore of 30 would need 120 RP to raise it to 31. That is over a year of saving RP if he only gains 28 RP a turn.

Even lowering it to X2 would mean he needs 60 RP. In that case, I could see in a peaceful time a regent saving enough to raise the score once a year.

[irdeggman]

Originally posted by destowe@Oct 14 2003, 11:00 AM
I thought it cost X4 the current bloodline score to raise the ability.

For a regent with a bloodscore of 30 would need 120 RP to raise it to 31. That is over a year of saving RP if he only gains 28 RP a turn.

Even lowering it to X2 would mean he needs 60 RP. In that case, I could see in a peaceful time a regent saving enough to raise the score once a year.
You are confusing what is in the playtest document with what we are talking about now, which is what is being done with the revision to Chapt 2 (that I'm currently putting together). In the playtest document a scion could gain RP per season equal to 2X his blood score, so the comparisons don't fit well.

[ConjurerDragon]

irdeggman schrieb:

> This post was generated by the Birthright.net message forum.

> You can view the entire thread at:

> http://www.birthright.net/forums/index.php?act=ST&f=36&t=2012

> irdeggman wrote:

>
[QUOTE]A scion`s bloodline cannot increase more than two points per year.

...

> > It is not supposed to be easy to raise a regent`s blood score. The usurpation rules of the

BRCS - playtest made it much easier to gain from killing a scion than

the old 2nd ed rules did.

> In all the campaigns I`ve run and played in (about 5 different versions) no player had ever

been able to raise his PC`s bloodscore via wise rule. If they had the

RP (which most did after

a while) they couldn`t afford to take a domain action to accomplish

it. They usually had more

pressing matters to be concerned with.



Perhaps the rule is too restricting for short games.

Most PBEMS for example don´t last for ages. Some go for only 10 or 20

turns - in such a game raising bloodline is a loss for most regents as

they can never earn back their expense of RP by their higher bloodline.



In 2E terms for example if you spend 31 RP to raise your bloodline from

30 to 31 you need 31 turns to turn even and make a profit.



The higher the bloodline the longer it takes until the expense actually

pay off.

bye

Michael

[Osprey]

As far as the 2X versus the older 5X (from the playtest) I tried to find a multiplier that was easy to use, X3 yielding what I thought was far too great a number. Raising bloodscore would not deplete the regent. For example a regent with a blood score of 30 wants to raise his blood score to 31. Let's say he gains 28 RP per season from holding and the like. He needs to maintain a 31 RP balance for two consecutive seasons, which means that after the first season (it would require at least a season to build up a bank to build from) let's say he banked half his RP gains so at the start of the 2nd season he has 14 +28 = 42 RP in his bank. He can spend 11 RP during that season and not have to lower his reserve below the minimal amount. The next season he gains another 2, so if he spent the 11 and only carried over 31 he would start that season with 31 + 28 = 59 RP of which the regent could spend all 28 gained that season. At the end of that season the regent's bloodscore would increase to 31 so he would start the next season being able to collect 31 RP per season instead of 28.

It is not supposed to be easy to raise a regent's blood score. The usurpation rules of the BRCS - playtest made it much easier to gain from killing a scion than the old 2nd ed rules did.

In all the campaigns I've run and played in (about 5 different versions) no player had ever been able to raise his PC's bloodscore via wise rule. If they had the RP (which most did after a while) they couldn't afford to take a domain action to accomplish it. They usually had more pressing matters to be concerned with.

--------------------
Duane Eggert

OK, the idea's growing on me...it DOES harken back to the original system, with the exception of the reserve limit. Out of curiosity, what was the basis of creating RP limits? Were there frequently regents with outrageous RP reserves in 2e Birthright?

I think collection limits are necessary, and well-designed. But why is it necessary to put a low cap on reserves, when there are so many in-game ways for regents to spend RP? In the original system, a regent with maximum collection still couldn't raise their bloodlines more than once every other season unless they won gains of regency through heroic actions. In which case it seemed justified that they could increase bloodline beyond the normal rate of progression.

It seems you think that system was broken or unbalanced.

I'm not putting forth an opinion on the matter, as I'm not entirely decided on what system is best. But I can't help but think that your idea that a scion needs time to "adjust" to a stronger bloodline sounds more like a reason that was developed to justify a mechanical invention, rather than the idea spawning the mechanics.

What experiences justified these kinds of limits? Were they widespread experiences & complaints of 2e players/DM's, or the loud voices of a few?

Sorry if it seems like I'm grilling you on this topic, it's just that the bloodline system is so central to the uniqueness of Birthright, and thus any revision should be (IMO) carefully reviewed.

Overall, though, I'm starting to like the sytem, but would like to hear more of the design reasons behind it. Thanks!

-Osprey

[irdeggman]

Originally posted by Osprey@Oct 14 2003, 07:13 PM

OK, the idea's growing on me...it DOES harken back to the original system, with the exception of the reserve limit. Out of curiosity, what was the basis of creating RP limits? Were there frequently regents with outrageous RP reserves in 2e Birthright?

I think collection limits are necessary, and well-designed. But why is it necessary to put a low cap on reserves, when there are so many in-game ways for regents to spend RP? In the original system, a regent with maximum collection still couldn't raise their bloodlines more than once every other season unless they won gains of regency through heroic actions. In which case it seemed justified that they could increase bloodline beyond the normal rate of progression.

It seems you think that system was broken or unbalanced.


What experiences justified these kinds of limits? Were they widespread experiences & complaints of 2e players/DM's, or the loud voices of a few?

Sorry if it seems like I'm grilling you on this topic, it's just that the bloodline system is so central to the uniqueness of Birthright, and thus any revision should be (IMO) carefully reviewed.

Overall, though, I'm starting to like the sytem, but would like to hear more of the design reasons behind it. Thanks!

-Osprey
OK here's my shot at this one.

The blood score system in the playtest document was based on Doom's version which had pretty much the most widespread use out there. He had received many comments on his document (on the board and via private e-mails) and incorporated a lot of them, when we put together the BRCS-playtest we started with his version, added what we (as a group) thought would be improvements and then beat it senseless in an attempt to pick it to pieces.

From my personnal experience, we had found that the RP cap would have been real useful especially in dealing with NPC realms. For the most part DMs only keep records on the realms that are most involved with the PCs' and leave the others to run "automatically". Well what happens is that all of a sudden the PCs make an incursion into a formally inactive NPC's realm and meet with disproportionate resistance since the NPC had an immense pool of RP from his inaction. In general NPCs and PCs should be handled the same way, that is "what is good for the goose is good for the gander".

Several factors were considered with coming up with the pool limit:

It was decided that we wanted a method to automatically increase blood score without having to use a domain action (see previous discussion on this one).

We wanted as simple a mechanic as posssible to keep track of things (GB, RP reserves, etc.), especially for NPC realms.

The domain system created in the playtest document was GB based vice RP based, so regents would have a lot of RP hanging around that they would have used in the 2nd system. This would lead to potentially large RP banks just sitting around.

RP should be used for something and some incentive for using should be given. We thought that was one of the reasons to be a regent in the first place, to use RP to further the domain. In some of my campaigns I had players playing regents who took no active interest in running their domain and pretty much left things to run on automatic, this is just not very good overall for a campaign.

Now there are not really all that many ways to use RP in the game. Increase in blood score, cast realm spells and influence domain actions are about the only ones that I know of.

Well I hope that answers your question. Flip me over I'm grilled on one side. :D

[Ariadne]

Originally posted by Irdeggman
Changing some of the blood abilities (examples but not all inclusive):

Alertness – rewriting, since the previous version was the same as the feat and blood abilities should be slightly more powerful than feats.
Great idea. Something like granting the feat (for PrcCs), but a +4 bonus or something. Putting the feat (unchanged) into into the “enhanced sense” (Reynir) blood ability would be a good change too.


Elemental Control – rewriting to change to Summon Monster V vice III. This allows a medium elemental vice a small one. A medium elemental still doesn’t gain any DR, so it is not too powerful.
Great!!! BTW, since it is a great blood ability, a large elemental wouldn’t still be too powerful...


Endurance – removed it from the list of blood abilities. It wasn’t in the original rules. Put it as an example of a DM created new blood ability.
Another really good change. Endurance I would put as a part of the “resistance”(minor) blood ability of Reynir.

Generally any Bld system that favores both (random and non-random) should be encouraged...


Originally posted by Osprey
Perhaps the constant powers should be Supernatural rather than Extraordinary, as all blood powers have a divine energy basis. For example, Resistance, Enhanced Senses, Alertness. This way the powers can't be dispelled, but they can be suppressed in anti-magic zones. Just a thought...
Generally I’m of same opinion, I only would make Bloodmark an extraordinary ability, because it is always seen (even in an antimagic field) and never lost (even if the scion has lost his bloodline).

[irdeggman]

Elemental Control:

This was one of the blood abilities that many people had trouble with from the original 2nd ed version. Several people had expressed concern over how out of balanced it was for a 1st level scion to be able to summon a creature that couldn't be hit with non-magical weapons.

Making it a medium elemental keeps it from gaining the DR that large ones start to receive (this translated into the DR 10/+1 of 3rd ed). The 3.5 version uses DR much differently than did the 3.0 version (large elementals have DR 5/-).

In order to be able to summon a large elemental it would require summmon monster VII, which is a 7th level spell and the blood ability also grants 3-5th level spell abilities in addition to the summoning one. No I tend to think it is pretty balanced as it is without causing the problems that wer brought up earlier with the ability being too powerful.

[Osprey]

Elemental Control:

This was one of the blood abilities that many people had trouble with from the original 2nd ed version. Several people had expressed concern over how out of balanced it was for a 1st level scion to be able to summon a creature that couldn't be hit with non-magical weapons.

Making it a medium elemental keeps it from gaining the DR that large ones start to receive (this translated into the DR 10/+1 of 3rd ed). The 3.5 version uses DR much differently than did the 3.0 version (large elementals have DR 5/-).

In order to be able to summon a large elemental it would require summmon monster VII, which is a 7th level spell and the blood ability also grants 3-5th level spell abilities in addition to the summoning one. No I tend to think it is pretty balanced as it is without causing the problems that wer brought up earlier with the ability being too powerful.

--------------------
Duane Eggert

How about Control Water for Masela? It puts it more on par with Stone Shape, and Water Walk is pretty lame...Similarly, Control Winds is a lot more interesting than Gust of Wind, but that might be a little too potent.

Here's a possibility for the Summon Elemental ability: instead of using summon monster as a base spell, why not use something like [Lesser] Planar Ally. The reasoning is that this is a once per week power, yet the duration of Summon Monster is only 1 round per level. Planar Ally, on the other hand, is based on the creature performing 1 service, like 1 combat or guard duty or an errand; much more versatile and useful for a regent.

Also, if using 3.5 elementals, a large elemental with DR 5/-, summoned once per week (rare use on an adventure scale) is not ridiculously powerful, IMO. If it were daily, that would be quite a different story. In 2e the elementals would have been 16HD, correct? Net result = powered down blood ability. I hate to see Great blood abilities weakened - they don't seem so "great" anymore.

Just my 2 cents on that one.

[destowe]

Sorry about the confusion about the BRCS and the next version.

But I now have a few comments about what happens next.

If it now costs X2 to increase the blood score, what will the modifier be for the times that a regent needs to exchange a blood point for regency? If it is only X2 then there is now net change. I would hope for X1.5 or even X1 the blood score to regency.

Also a strange thought that could be abused. A regent gets a blood ability from raising his blood score, then loses his new point (and the ability). He then increases his blood score at a later time.

I could see the DM stating that the same ability must be chosen as was taken the first time. If they can choose a different one, and if there is no penaly for exhanging blood points for regency, I can see someone redoing their latest ability every few months to get the best advantage for the next adventure.

[irdeggman]

Originally posted by destowe@Oct 15 2003, 02:48 PM

If it now costs X2 to increase the blood score, what will the modifier be for the times that a regent needs to exchange a blood point for regency? If it is only X2 then there is now net change. I would hope for X1.5 or even X1 the blood score to regency.

You've confused me with this comment. I thought that the text I had provided earlier covered this. It does not cost X2 to raise the blood score. It costs the new blood score value, but the reserve must be maintained at the target score for 2 consecutive seasons. If you are asking for something else, please rephrase the question so that I can address it properly.

"The remaining method of a scion increasing his bloodline score is through wise rulership. A scion’s bloodline score can be permanently increased by one point by spending a number of RP equal to the character’s target bloodline score, i.e., his current bloodline score plus one. This increase occurs automatically when a scion’s regency reserve exceeds the amount necessary for the increase for two successive domain turns (six months). Such an increase is uncommon (many characters will never realize an increase in bloodline strength). A scion's bloodline cannot increase more than two points per year. A character's bloodline score may decrease if they are forced (or choose to) spend regency points exceeding the points in their current regency reserve. If a scion spends RP beyond their reserve, their bloodline score is permanently reduced by one point. This reduction, however, provides RP equal to the character's previous bloodline score. This process continues as necessary to pay the required RP debt."

[irdeggman]

Originally posted by Osprey@Oct 15 2003, 11:05 AM

How about Control Water for Masela? It puts it more on par with Stone Shape, and Water Walk is pretty lame...Similarly, Control Winds is a lot more interesting than Gust of Wind, but that might be a little too potent.

Here's a possibility for the Summon Elemental ability: instead of using summon monster as a base spell, why not use something like [Lesser] Planar Ally. The reasoning is that this is a once per week power, yet the duration of Summon Monster is only 1 round per level. Planar Ally, on the other hand, is based on the creature performing 1 service, like 1 combat or guard duty or an errand; much more versatile and useful for a regent.

Also, if using 3.5 elementals, a large elemental with DR 5/-, summoned once per week (rare use on an adventure scale) is not ridiculously powerful, IMO. If it were daily, that would be quite a different story. In 2e the elementals would have been 16HD, correct? Net result = powered down blood ability. I hate to see Great blood abilities weakened - they don't seem so "great" anymore.

Just my 2 cents on that one.
As I mentioned earlier this was one of the blood abilities that people considered "overpowered" in 2nd ed. I tried to find the roughly equivalent spells in 3rd (3.5 now) ed that corresponded to the 2nd ed version.

I also tried to keep in line with the guidelines for balancing blood abilities (already in the BRCS-playtest) as an attempt to keep all minor abilities on par with each and the same for major and great.

[destowe]

A character just raised his blood score and his RP score is now lower. Due to some loss of regency from a minor event the character needs to covert a blood point to RP to make the costs.

Does the character get the same amount of RP back that was spent to raise his score?

I think to raise the score from 40 to 41 costs 41 RP now. But to go from 41 back to 40 gets 41 RP or is there a penalty, like only getting 20 RP back and dropping the score to 40.

[irdeggman]

Originally posted by destowe@Oct 16 2003, 08:54 PM
A character just raised his blood score and his RP score is now lower. Due to some loss of regency from a minor event the character needs to covert a blood point to RP to make the costs.

Does the character get the same amount of RP back that was spent to raise his score?

I think to raise the score from 40 to 41 costs 41 RP now. But to go from 41 back to 40 gets 41 RP or is there a penalty, like only getting 20 RP back and dropping the score to 40.
Barring anything that comes out in the Running a Domain Chapter to the contrary (it takes precedence in this issue) a regent gets his current blood score in RP when he converts a point of blood score to RP and not the 'new blood score value'. So you are correct in your statement here except don't think in terms of what was spent think it terms of what is being sacrificed, its semantics but points out the 'correct' starting point for an action like this.

[The Jew]

In the BRCS a regent gained half as much regency converting a blood point to regency as it cost to convert regency to a blood point. Why are you changing this particular rule. It helped to make raising a bloodline much more unlikely.

[Ariadne]

Originally posted by irdeggman
I also tried to keep in line with the guidelines for balancing blood abilities (already in the BRCS-playtest) as an attempt to keep all minor abilities on par with each and the same for major and great.
That would be nessessary, if blood abilities are free to choose. IMO randomly created bloodlines needn’t be watched this hard, but since this system is made for both, watching them is not bad. Is my idea this unbalancing? I don’t think so. Granting simply an extra feat is nice, but not overwhelming. A blood ability is something “god granted” so it can be a bit more “special”.

[irdeggman]

Originally posted by Ariadne@Oct 17 2003, 11:45 AM

Originally posted by irdeggman
I also tried to keep in line with the guidelines for balancing blood abilities (already in the BRCS-playtest) as an attempt to keep all minor abilities on par with each and the same for major and great.
That would be nessessary, if blood abilities are free to choose. IMO randomly created bloodlines needn’t be watched this hard, but since this system is made for both, watching them is not bad. Is my idea this unbalancing? I don’t think so. Granting simply an extra feat is nice, but not overwhelming. A blood ability is something “god granted” so it can be a bit more “special”.
Well since that comment was addressing someone else's suggestion and not yours, Ariadne, it is hard to make the comparison.

One of the comments that came from Azrai was that the ECLs were off for random generated blood abilities. Specifically if someone got a "bad" ability then they felt ripped off. By trying to equalize the abilities of the same strength this helps to mitigate that type of issue. regardless of whether or not there is an ECL involved, if 2 people roll for the same type of ability (i.e, each gets a major ability) then their resultant random rolls shuld be pretty much on par with each other so that neither feels like they have ended up on the short end of the stick. In order to keep this type of balance is a feat like ability is added to one blood ability then the same equivalent power level needs to be added to blooda bilities of the same level in order to maintain this fairness. Pretty soon the blood abilities have grown so powerful that drastically alter the game in and of themselves. Blood abilities were supposed to be something that gave scions a "little something extra" but not something that made them outclass the non-scions so readily.

[ConjurerDragon]

The Jew schrieb:

> This post was generated by the Birthright.net message forum.

> You can view the entire thread at:

> http://www.birthright.net/forums/index.php?act=ST&f=36&t=2012

>

> The Jew wrote:

> In the BRCS a regent gained half as much regency converting a blood point to regency as it

cost to convert regency to a blood point. Why are you changing this

particular rule. It helped

to make raising a bloodline much more unlikely.



I don´t remember that rule from the BRCS, but if that statement is

right, then magical items like "Bloodstone Rings" (from the 2E Book of

Regency) would become less valuable when anyone can convert bloodline to

RP without any loss.

bye

Michael

[Osprey]

I’m eliminating the scion templates and going with scion class levels. This is more conducive to allowing ECL’d characters to start in a 1st level campaign. I’m basically taking the scion classes from proposal D and tweaking them some.


What "tweaks" are being made, exactly? I'm trying to write up some NPC proposals for the Atlas, but need some specifics.

Here's what I'm going on: BAB as cleric/rogue; d8 hit die; high Will save, low Fort and Reflex (this only makes sense, as blood powers focus the will more than the body); 4 +INT skill points per level, w/ class skills similar to the Noble.

Anything I'm missing (besides gaining appropriate blood powers at each level of progression) or have wrong?

[The Jew]

Originally posted by ConjurerDragon@Oct 19 2003, 12:18 AM

I don´t remember that rule from the BRCS.
michael, check out page 37 of the BRCS under "increasing/decreasing bloodline score".

[ConjurerDragon]

The Jew schrieb:

> This post was generated by the Birthright.net message forum.

> You can view the entire thread at:

> http://www.birthright.net/forums/index.php?act=ST&f=36&t=2012

>

> The Jew wrote:

>


> I don´t remember that rule from the BRCS.

> michael, check out page 37 of the BRCS under "increasing/decreasing bloodline score".



Found it. Thankyou.

Michael