Blood As Templet

[teloft]

I belive there has been some discussion on this topic before, could somone be so kind to post the link of thet descussion here in htis tread. :)

Im thinking of the vampire templet. and the half celestial templet. ... well acsuly all the templets. ..


way is it bad to have the blooded using the blooded templet.

:ph34r:

[Osprey]

Try these threads (currently on page 3 of the BRCS forum):

Bloodline Abilities
Game balance for Scions

Chapter 2 - Blood Score Proposals

[teloft]

coulnt open page 3, streange...

and the Search engen bugs me..

:ph34r:

[Osprey]

Try extending the amount of time at the bottom of the forum page. The default shows things from "the last 30 days." Extend it to 60 or more, and you'll be able to look further back.

[Ariadne]

Originally posted by teloft@Oct 23 2003, 09:23 PM
way is it bad to have the blooded using the blooded templet.

The discussion is been made more than once. I prefer the template version to, and Irdeggmans "Scion class" is like those monster classes presented in the "Savage Species" book. If you want, you can see it a bit like a template...

[teloft]

what is wrong with calling it a templet?

you can gain templets and luse them, as with blood.

you can increas your HD by templets, and even lose HD's

you can gain Spell like abilitys, EX, Spells, Sp.. and anything.. :) lol

it will usualy increas your CR, and efective Level in order to count Xp. as Blood works.

in what sence dos it NOT work for blooded characters to have it a templet?

:ph34r:

[irdeggman]

Originally posted by teloft@Oct 28 2003, 07:03 AM
what is wrong with calling it a templet?

you can gain templets and luse them, as with blood.

you can increas your HD by templets, and even lose HD's

you can gain Spell like abilitys, EX, Spells, Sp.. and anything.. :) lol

it will usualy increas your CR, and efective Level in order to count Xp. as Blood works.

in what sence dos it NOT work for blooded characters to have it a templet?

:ph34r:
The absolute biggest problem is trying to start a 1st level campaign with +1 (or more) ECL templates. That was why we were leaning towards the scion class. Based on the Savage Species format it allows an ECL'd character to play along side 1st level characters.

If a DM allows one player to play an ECL +2 character (effective level 3) and says that another can only play a 1st level one then this is blatently unfair to the players. Using scion class levels helps to balance this out. By including class benefits like HD, BAB, etc with each scion class level then things have a better balance.

[teloft]

I dont realy like the idee of 'the scion class' as it gose into the class system.

... whell what Im thinking rigth now..

this is revolusinary to the howl blood system, and sould be thown away as fast as possible, but Ill post it anyway

to have a skill asosiaded with the templet, like with the were-'whatever' tay need there controle shape skill in order to controle there shape chansing ability.

so this skill is how good you are in applying your blood in your daily life. giving you acsess to more frequent use of your abilitys as you learn more about them and your selfe.

the skills:
Manifest blood ability (Wis) (only for blooded ones)
KNOWLEDGE (INT; TRAINED ONLY) (of blood) (+2 synerg on manifest blood ab)
CONCENTRATION (CON) (+2 synergy on manifest blood ab)

and then

PERFORM (CHA) for some of the abilitys

__________________________________________________ ______

Now Im thinking to have each of the major blood abilitys as semi templet.

So you only gain + ECL by begin able to manifest your abilitys frequently, and if you have some more permanet and powerfull abilitys.

I like to think of blood as temlet becous it can be lost easely if one is not cerfull, and also gaind if you are not cerfull in your killing of others.

:ph34r:

Edit:

I would add one max skill to blooded characters.
or (lv+3) of skillpoints. For the need of more skilles as you are blooded.

:ph34r:

[lordofallandnothing]

the way that i am running mine is a little different i guess then eh,lol.
i am making the base ability to have it as a feat that you have to start out with.with that feat you gain a template of tainted blood strength,which gives you 1 bloodline point,your choice of deriviation.once you reach a certain amount of bloodline points you gain a template automatically which allows you to access higher level bloodline abilties for the templates raise your bloodline strength category.and i have a few different prestige classes that raise your amount bloodline points as well.of course you can always raise your amount of bloodline points through the usual means of slaying another blooded being or through using regency points.what do you think of this system?if anyone likes it or dislikes it please let me know.once i have a webpage built up i will elaborate on it there or maybe i will do so in the other forum here where i am starting to detail my deity project.hope to hear from you all soon :D

[kgauck]

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

From: "irdeggman" <brnetboard@BIRTHRIGHT.NET>

Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 6:52 AM





> The absolute biggest problem is trying to start a 1st level

> campaign with +1 (or more) ECL templates.

>

> If a DM allows one player to play an ECL +2 character (effective

> level 3) and says that another can only play a 1st level one then this

> is blatently unfair to the players.



How is this unfair? Why would a DM say another player can only play a 1st

level character? What is preventing everyone from being blooded? Why isn`t

ECL self-balancing? I don`t see a problem.



Kenneth Gauck

kgauck@mchsi.com

[lordofallandnothing]

that is why i like my system so much for cause the feat gives you a bloodline strength of tainted and 1 bloodline point which basically means that at first level you are blowing a feat to hopefully be able to recoup your loss later on once you get your bloodline points up higher. :) i am fairly sure that my players do not like this too much but most of them still choose to be blooded
basically when you gain the tainted blood template it has a CR+0 just like the dang spellfire template in forgotten realms and that is alot more powerful and that is rated as a +0 template as well and it is ALOT more powerful then mine especially at lower level they justify the fact that it is a CR+0 template by the fact that a first level character has to blow a feat on it.

[irdeggman]

Originally posted by kgauck@Oct 28 2003, 09:41 AM
----- Original Message -----

From: "irdeggman" <brnetboard@BIRTHRIGHT.NET>

Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 6:52 AM





> The absolute biggest problem is trying to start a 1st level

> campaign with +1 (or more) ECL templates.

>

> If a DM allows one player to play an ECL +2 character (effective

> level 3) and says that another can only play a 1st level one then this

> is blatently unfair to the players.



How is this unfair? Why would a DM say another player can only play a 1st

level character? What is preventing everyone from being blooded? Why isn`t

ECL self-balancing? I don`t see a problem.



Kenneth Gauck

kgauck@mchsi.com













If you use a random system then not everyone starts with the same ECL&#39;d template. This has been pointed out by Azrai and others that use pure random generation systems.

You are absolutely correct in that the only method to balance this is by allowing everyone to start at the highest ECL (which is what was specified in the DMG in relation to ECL&#39;d races). But, I pointed out that you couldn&#39;t start a first level campaign using ECLs.

[ConjurerDragon]

Kenneth Gauck schrieb:

> ----- Original Message -----

> From: "irdeggman" <brnetboard@BIRTHRIGHT.NET>

> Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 6:52 AM

>>The absolute biggest problem is trying to start a 1st level

>>campaign with +1 (or more) ECL templates.

>>

>> If a DM allows one player to play an ECL +2 character (effective

>>level 3) and says that another can only play a 1st level one then this

>>is blatently unfair to the players.

>

> How is this unfair?

Because a ECL 3 character is more powerful than a ECL 1 character. And

some people desperately wish to have balance in all situations and

between everyone.



> Why would a DM say another player can only play a 1st

> level character?

Perhaps because he would share my opinion that blooded characters ARE

more powerful than unblooded and balance in that theme is a moot point

as Birthright is "meant" to be played by blooded PC regents and not

unblooded PC underlings, servants or peasants. ;-)





> What is preventng everyone from being blooded?

If I extrapolate from the email then the DM starts all PC´s as

firstlevel characters but some have +2 ECL (blooded) and the unblooded

has not.

bye

Michael

[kgauck]

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

From: "irdeggman" <brnetboard@BIRTHRIGHT.NET>

Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 10:57 AM





> If you use a random system then not everyone starts with the same

> ECL`d template. This has been pointed out by Azrai and others that

> use pure random generation systems.



If you want a specific outcome, then maybe a random system isn`t the best

way to go about it. This requires explicit statement?



> You are absolutely correct in that the only method to balance this is

> by allowing everyone to start at the highest ECL (which is what was

> specified in the DMG in relation to ECL`d races). But, I pointed out

> that you couldn`t start a first level campaign using ECLs.



Huh? I would never write such nonsense. The idea that all characters

should be equal in power is silly. What purpose does it serve to use a

cookie cutter to create balance? As a DM I don`t need for everyone to be of

the same level to give them important things to do in the game. Experience

and thus advancement is already accounted for by the character level system.

Using encounters that are closer to the lower ECL characters is a much

better balancing tool, for a variety of reasons.



I`ve introduced new players into games at 1st level, seen uneven game

attendence create uneven advancement, and seen characters die and players

start over with first level characters. Varied level parties are not a

problem. In fact, widely spaced parties create all kinds of excellent

gaming opportunities. This kind of balance is the worst kind of meta-game

thinking and is a total red herring.



Kenneth Gauck

kgauck@mchsi.com

[geeman]

At 12:00 PM 10/28/2003 -0600, Kenneth Gauck wrote:



>This kind of balance is the worst kind of meta-game thinking and is a

>total red herring.



Well, it`s not a _total_ red herring. I think you missed the fundamental

aspect of the issue; that it is during character generation. The bloodline

as template issue has two effects in that regard. First, as was noted it

interferes with creation of 1st level characters (unless one only uses +0

ECL templates.) Starting out at 1st level is a mainstay of the game, and

not an unreasonable thing for one to want to do in a low-level themed

setting like BR. Second, it`s not unreasonable for a DM to want to start

out players on an equal footing. If levels become uneven later because of

player attendance, character death, uneven XP awards for various in-game

activities, etc. then that`s fine, but that`s a bit different from having

things uneven from the get go, which is an issue when assigning ECL. It

can, of course, be interesting to play parties of characters with different

levels, and even during character generation balance isn`t entirely

possible, but it`s not an unreasonable thing to try for at the beginning of

a campaign. Neither of these things will bring the house of cards down,

but it`s not a red herring, nor is it really meta-game thinking per se.



Gary

[irdeggman]

Originally posted by kgauck@Oct 28 2003, 01:22 PM
> You are absolutely correct in that the only method to balance this is

> by allowing everyone to start at the highest ECL (which is what was

> specified in the DMG in relation to ECL`d races). But, I pointed out

> that you couldn`t start a first level campaign using ECLs.



Huh? I would never write such nonsense. The idea that all characters

should be equal in power is silly. What purpose does it serve to use a

cookie cutter to create balance? As a DM I don`t need for everyone to be of

the same level to give them important things to do in the game.
Kenneth Gauck

kgauck@mchsi.com


I&#39;m sorry if I misinterpreted your earlier statement
"How is this unfair? Why would a DM say another player can only play a 1st level character?"

Which I thought seemed to be saying the same thing I was that characters should be starting at the same character level.


By giving all players something to do, regardless of their relative level - you are essentially inserting a level balancer by using DM fiat. And I applaud your intentions as a DM for trying to keep everyone involved.

Characters that are of lower level than the rest of the party tend to have less to do and fewer options in what they can do and this by the very design of the game forces a good DM to do what you do to keep the players&#39; interested.

The very first character I ever played (in 1st edition) was a 1st level wizard adventuring with a group of 5+ characters. So after my character cast his sleep spell I was forced to basically carry whatever the remainder of the group choose not to. If I didn&#39;t play with another group later on I might not have ever been hooked. There was nothing as boring as a low level wizard in 1st (or even 2nd) ed. No bonus spells (my character had like a 12 Int - down side of the 3d6 in order rules of the time).

So the bottom line is it is very important to have a balance between what the starting characters can do, whether this is done mechanically (via balanced levels) or via positive DM management of the game.

[kgauck]

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

From: "Gary" <geeman@SOFTHOME.NET>

Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 1:21 PM





> I think you missed the fundamental aspect of the issue; that it is during

> character generation.



The player who joins late and starts at first level is generating a

character. The player whose character died and generates a new character at

first level is generating a character. Tell me again what I am missing?



> The bloodline as template issue has two effects in that regard. First, as

> was noted it interferes with creation of 1st level characters (unless one

> only uses +0 ECL templates.) Starting out at 1st level is a mainstay of

> the game, and not an unreasonable thing for one to want to do in a low-

> level themed setting like BR. Second, it`s not unreasonable for a DM to

> want to start out players on an equal footing.



Starting at 1st level, as opposed to 2nd level, is an utterly arbitrary

standard. Especially, when much of what makes you 2nd level isn`t class

abilities, but blood abilities.



In the majority of encounters, a 1st level character with a blooded template

and a 1st level character without will not be significantly different.

Playing with such variety is hardly an obstacle hard to overcome. There

will typically be more difference between classes in a given encounter than

between the blooded and unblooded character.



> Neither of these things will bring the house of cards down,

> but it`s not a red herring, nor is it really meta-game thinking per se.



Two people who meet are unaware of their levels. Only the player thinks in

terms of their levels. What`s not mega-game thinking regarding levels?



Kenneth Gauck

kgauck@mchsi.com

[Osprey]

Starting at 1st level, as opposed to 2nd level, is an utterly arbitrary
standard. Especially, when much of what makes you 2nd level isn`t class
abilities, but blood abilities.

In the majority of encounters, a 1st level character with a blooded template
and a 1st level character without will not be significantly different.
Playing with such variety is hardly an obstacle hard to overcome. There
will typically be more difference between classes in a given encounter than
between the blooded and unblooded character.


This was exactly the reasoning behind making those blooded ECL&#39;s actual scion character levels. Giving them a few hit points, skill points, and the advantage of having those levels count towards feats and ability raises re. total character levels really helps balance out the discrepencies between the relatively minor advantages of blood abilities compared to the much greater powers of full character class levels. I consider most blood abilities to be "a little something extra," and the advantage that represents really diminishes at higher levels. I recently adopted the scion class in my own campaign, and am really quite happy with the greater sense of balance between blooded and unblooded chatacters of equal level.

The only thing that&#39;s a sticking point for me is that starting scions would all have the same number of skill points (I use 4+Int per level) at 1st level,regardless of actual character class later on. My house rule adaptation was to only give "per level" skill points until the scions gained their first actual character class level, at which point they recieved the starting skill points relative to their actual profession of choice. Otherwise blooded rogues, nobles, bards (3.5), and rangers (3.5) really lost out in starting skills, although the others (fighters, clerics, mages) actually gained extra skills.

[geeman]

At 04:52 PM 10/28/2003 -0600, Kenneth Gauck wrote:



> > I think you missed the fundamental aspect of the issue; that it is during

> > character generation.

>

>The player who joins late and starts at first level is generating a

>character. The player whose character died and generates a new character at

>first level is generating a character. Tell me again what I am missing?



I listed two things: First, that it`s not unreasonable for a DM to want

characters to begin at 1st level. Yes, that is an utterly arbitrary

standard, but so what? It`s just one of the many arbitrary standards the

DM establishes as the basis for his campaign. Starting off at 1st level

isn`t so much the standard of D&D anymore, but it`s still a common thing,

and not unreasonable for a DM to arbitrarily set that standard at 1st level

rather than 2nd, 3rd or 4th, particularly in BR since the setting is

"low-level" thematically. Using bloodline as a template that assigns an

ECL value prevents a DM from saying he wants to have a campaign in which

players are both scions and 1st level.



Second, it`s not mandatory that all PCs begin at the same power level, but

it`s not an unreasonable thing for the DM to want to do for lots of

reasons. Some of those reasons might not actually have a direct

role-playing relationship, but that doesn`t mean they should be

ignored. DMs should be able to establish whatever standards they like, and

that should be supported by the rules when reasonable. The relative power

of PCs can change dramatically during play by various means (individual XP

awards, character death, gaining access to magic items, not to mention some

of the inequities of the class system) but it`s not a bad idea for all

players to start off at roughly the same level of power not only to foster

a general sense of fair play but also in order for everyone to judge their

progression from a common point. That`s where the fundamental "blatantly

unfair" comments come from. Personally, I avoid random character

generation for exactly this reason.



Several people have suggested that scions should have to learn how to use

their blood abilities rather than suddenly be gifted with them when they

reach an age of majority. I`ve always liked the idea, but not found a good

mechanic for doing something like that until the Savage Species text came

out--IMO the most innovative thing to come out of WotC since the 3e

release. An approach along those lines is a good idea, and would address

the situation here. Someone can still play imbalanced characters in a

party if one chooses, but a system to gauge and portray a scion other than

templates would still be useful to people who want to take a different

approach.



>In the majority of encounters, a 1st level character with a blooded template

>and a 1st level character without will not be significantly different.

>Playing with such variety is hardly an obstacle hard to overcome. There

>will typically be more difference between classes in a given encounter than

>between the blooded and unblooded character.



Well, that`s basically true. We`re talking about the difference between an

effective character level or two, so it`s not like characters are getting

scaled completely out of play. A few ECL can make a difference, but that`s

mostly based on the circumstances of play. However, I`m afraid it`s still

not the issue. Playing variety isn`t a problem at all. In fact, it`s

something to be encouraged. The problem is still that during character

generation the DM has to either decide not to play scions with an ECL

adjustment, go with 2nd or higher level PCs or have players generate

characters that have different power levels. A means of making things more

evenly distributed is a legitimate thing to do in order to address the issue.



> > Neither of these things will bring the house of cards down,

> > but it`s not a red herring, nor is it really meta-game thinking per se.

>

>Two people who meet are unaware of their levels. Only the player thinks in

>terms of their levels. What`s not mega-game thinking regarding levels?



That by itself isn`t meta-game thinking. Meta-game thinking is when one

bases a character`s actions on "the logic" that they are playing a RPG

rather than on the logic that they are in a particular game world. It

needn`t have anything in particular to do with character levels at

all. One has to take oneself "out of the game" and base in-game activities

on that. That is, when players think all mazes must have a minotaur based

on their recognition that they are engaged in a game where minotaurs are

standard maze dwellers if their PCs would not have that kind of

information. A player who looks at the number of d4`s that the DM rolls

when he is hit by a NPC wizard`s _Magic Missile_ and then uses some magical

device that he knows will be effective on his opponent`s character level is

meta-gaming. Not wanting to use templates so that one can start PCs off at

1st level isn`t meta-gaming.



Unfortunately, "meta-gaming" has become one of the pejorative terms of D&D

that often gets more attention than it deserves. Even the DMG makes very

little hay about it, describing the problem in mild terms. Coming up with

a way of determining bloodline that doesn`t affect the power scale at 1st

level isn`t meta-gaming. It`s meta-gaming neutral. A DM or player might

make decisions based on that game mechanic or they might not. The reality

is that it`s pretty easy to role-play out what would be meta-gaming in the

absence of some in-character play. Even the most min/maxed, munchkinned PC

can be covered up with good role-playing. As DMs we need to be able to see

past that to the manipulation of the rule that is being covered up.



Furthermore, in this case it`s an unfair rhetorical device to describe this

situation as meta-gaming because of the nature of the discussion. A

character flees combat with a group of trolls. Is he a coward or is he

unable to take on a CR X encounter? When asked why he fled the player

might say "I`m only 2nd level" and the DM then think the player is

meta-gaming. Unfortunately, in this situation the player was asked a

meta-question by the DM, and he responded in a meta-gaming fashion, so it`s

the kind of thing that forms a self-fulfilling prophecy. Players and DMs

should be able to make that kind of assessment without being accused of

meta-game thinking. Were he asked by the DM in-character he could respond

in-character. Since this is a discussion about the game mechanics it`s

going to have a game mechanical tone, so labelling it meta-gaming is

inaccurate.



Gary

[Green Knight]

Under the original BR rules, you could have a great bloodline but with a very low point score (and thus fewer abilities). So you could start a first level character with a great bloodline, but only give him a high enough score to give a +0 level adjustment. As he advances in level, he learns more about his divine heirtage (increase score), picking up level adjustments along with regualr class levels.



Cheers

Bjørn



-------------------------------------------------

WebMail fra Tele2 http://www.tele2.no

-------------------------------------------------

[kgauck]

I think bloodedness is obviously a template. I find the arguments for blood

as a class strained and artificial. I see none of the arguments presented

as even moderatly compelling. Starting at one just because its the first of

the ordinal numbers carrys about as much weight with me as insisting the

players sit in alphabetical order.



Since you want to define meta-game thinking so narrowly, fine. Let`s. Its

not meta-game thinking, its eleveating the mechanics to a central place in

the thinking of what character creation should look like. Rather than using

the system to create the character according to the demands of the

character, you are confining the character according to demands which are

entirely external to the game.



When I think of BR as a low level setting, what I take from that is the

notion that starting players are able to operate as rulers. They have their

blood abilities intact. They aren`t learned, they are innate.



Kenneth Gauck

kgauck@mchsi.com

[geeman]

At 09:26 AM 10/29/2003 -0600, Kenneth Gauck wrote:



>I think bloodedness is obviously a template. I find the arguments for blood

>as a class strained and artificial. I see none of the arguments presented

>as even moderatly compelling. Starting at one just because its the first of

>the ordinal numbers carrys about as much weight with me as insisting the

>players sit in alphabetical order.



Well, it wasn`t a template before 3e came out, and there isn`t anything

particularly compelling about the template concept in regards to reflecting

bloodline that I can see. Templates aren`t any more apt a game mechanic

than several others that have been suggested. In fact, templates have been

broken down successfully into character classes, so if one has a template

with an ECL modifier one has the fundamental aspects of a character class,

especially in BR where there is also the original materials text about

gaining hit points.



Using such a system one can start at whatever ordinal one likes, so those

who want to play things out at the earliest point supported by the rules

can do so, while those who want to skip a few digits can do that too...

regardless of the seating arrangements of the players.



>Since you want to define meta-game thinking so narrowly, fine. Let`s. Its

>not meta-game thinking, its eleveating the mechanics to a central place in

>the thinking of what character creation should look like. Rather than using

>the system to create the character according to the demands of the

>character, you are confining the character according to demands which are

>entirely external to the game.



The confines to which your claiming such characters would be limited to

aren`t actually confines at all. Where you`re suggesting characters must

begin a certain point (where ever their ECL modifier lands them) a method

that breaks that ECL down a la Savage Species or something like it allows

those levels to be played out. The "confines" to which the character is

limited, therefore, is actual play. If someone playing a major bloodline

gets 2 levels of play out of the system then that`s all the better. Rather

than engage in play, applying a template with an ECL allows a player (or

DM) to simply skip those levels and all the requisite character development

and actual role-playing they represent. That`s hardly creating a character

according to demands external to the game. Rather, it`s playing a

character from the beginning, through the development, and into the

fruition of powers to which you are suggesting he should simply be gifted

sans an characterization, any reward system or even any play.



>When I think of BR as a low level setting, what I take from that is the

>notion that starting players are able to operate as rulers. They have their

>blood abilities intact. They aren`t learned, they are innate.



I see the setting as low level in a general, thematic sense, not just in

the access of low-level characters to the domain level. There are, of

course, exceptional BR characters, but being a high level character in BR

means reaching the double digits of character levels--a laughably low

number for PCs in other campaign settings. In keeping with that a

low-level (1+) option is a good idea to maintain what is a campaign theme.



Gary

[kgauck]

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

From: "Gary" <geeman@SOFTHOME.NET>

Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2003 10:34 AM





> Well, it wasn`t a template before 3e came out,



It was totally a template. You made a character normally, then just stuck

the bloodline on top of that. What was missing were the accoutrements of a

template which are common in 3e, like assinging an ECL. Perhaps you thing

bloodline had levels in 2e?



> In fact, templates have been broken down successfully into character

classes



This should be stunningly obvious. That effective level can be converted

into actual levels should surprise no one.



> Rather, it`s playing a character from the beginning, through the

> development, and into the fruition of powers to which you are

> suggesting he should simply be gifted sans an characterization,

> any reward system or even any play.



Bingo. Because that`s what blood powers are. They are innate gifts of the

divine, not earned rewards for experience. This, obviously, is where the

central disagreement lies.



Kenneth Gauck

kgauck@mchsi.com

[irdeggman]

Originally posted by kgauck@Oct 29 2003, 12:52 PM
--
Bingo. Because that`s what blood powers are. They are innate gifts of the

divine, not earned rewards for experience. This, obviously, is where the

central disagreement lies.



Kenneth Gauck

kgauck@mchsi.com


Kenneth,
I think you are reading something into the scion class level proposals that isn&#39;t there. There is no tie into learning new blood abilities via the scion class systems proposed.

Gaining new blood abilities is strictly a function of the scion&#39;s blood score.

The scion class level (and the ECL&#39;d templates from the BRCS) both determined the level of the blood abilities gained. The templates had the major template required to gain major blood abilities, the scion class system has 1st level of scion class, etc.

Gaining and losing levels is something that people are very much used to from the 2nd ed system while gaining and losing templates is rather new. It does function similarly but it is still a relatively new concept.

[kgauck]

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

From: "irdeggman" <brnetboard@BIRTHRIGHT.NET>

Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2003 12:30 PM





> I think you are reading something into the scion class level proposals

> that isn`t there. There is no tie into learning new blood abilities via

the

> scion class systems proposed.



I am responding to Gary`s comments to the contrary. The BRCS has nothing to

do with it. I don`t use it, Gary hasn`t refered to it. So, I`m not reading

anything into the BRCS, beacuse I`m not reading it at all. I`m reading the

posts on the list.



Kenneth Gauck

kgauck@mchsi.com

[lordofallandnothing]

i will keep playing it the way i have been and "maybe" make up a prestige class or two that will alllow a being a way to enhance his already existing blood abilities or of powering them up(maybe one pretige class with two alternate sets of benefits that you may only ever take one set of,ie you could not take the class twice to get both sets) that way i can just have my fighter be a ruler and my wizard be a source holder etc. without adding on any more classes that they have to take,never read the playtest rules so i dont even know if you already have it covered this way or not yet.i am going to read it tomorrow to see if it sparks any ideas for my game here at home.anyways on this discussion why dont we all do what we normally do...use what you want to modify what ya can and junk the rest? :D :lol:

[geeman]

At 11:22 AM 10/29/2003 -0600, Kenneth Gauck wrote:



> > Well, it wasn`t a template before 3e came out,

>

>It was totally a template. You made a character normally, then just stuck

>the bloodline on top of that. What was missing were the accoutrements of a

>template which are common in 3e, like assinging an ECL. Perhaps you thing

>bloodline had levels in 2e?



That whole sentence read "Well, it wasn`t a template before 3e came out,

and there isn`t anything particularly compelling about the template concept

in regards to reflecting bloodline that I can see." Point being not that

the 2e function paralleled 3e`s templates (which is debatable--see below)

but that the 3e presentation of bloodline needn`t be a template any more

than it need be an ability score, a character class, etc.



In that context, the tainted, minor, major, great and true bloodline

strength values--which have no real functional use in the original 2e

bloodline mechanic other than to determine the dice rolled for bloodline

score--could very easily be described as the levels of bloodline in 2e. So

in a word, yes, I do think bloodline had levels in 2e. At least, they have

3e levels as much as they are a 3e template.



The truth of the matter, however, is that bloodline is broader than either

3e`s templates or character class game mechanics. It uses a different

criteria to "level up", it has an entirely different system of variable

powers, the system operates on both a domain and adventure level, there are

character class interactions, it determines access to the magic system, the

ability to control political units with a speed that is unrealistic by most

objective standards, and a whole slew of implications regarding to the path

to divinity; awn- and ersheghlien and all the accoutrement of

ascension. Templates alone are inadequate to accurately present the

concepts of bloodline. People have suggested using several other game

mechanics that have changed from 2e to 3e; skills, feats, ability scores in

addition to templates and character classes. Since it is the heart of the

setting (pun intended) it`s reasonable that it should encompass the whole

range of D20 mechanics including magic item creation, feats, skills, hero

points, etc. If such issues fit into 3e/3.5 mechanics then great, we

should use them. Where they don`t new ones should be used that convey as

nearly as possible the broad range of the concept--when they need to be

changed at all, that is. The bloodline score by itself should, I think,

remain the bloodline score, despite there being no 3e/3.5/D20 equivalent.

Other issues, however, should be converted more closely to 3e mechanics not

just to be in parity with the new rules but because as often as not they

convey the themes of bloodlines better than the original 2e rules did and

allow for a greater amount of character development. The ECL system is

just one of those items.



> > In fact, templates have been broken down successfully into character

> classes

>

>This should be stunningly obvious. That effective level can be converted

>into actual levels should surprise no one.



Well, there wasn`t a glimmer of the idea before Savage Species came out

that I ever recall reading, so the revelation would surprise anyone not

familiar with that book. Hindsight now fully in place, however, what

should really be obvious is not just that templates can be broken up into

character classes, but that such a method offers greater opportunities for

role-playing and character development than does simply assigning a +1 to

+3 ECL from a template does. Where it`s been suggested that an approach

that allows characters to start at 1st level will somehow "confining the

character according to demands which are entirely external to the game" in

reality the exact opposite is true.



> > Rather, it`s playing a character from the beginning, through the

> > development, and into the fruition of powers to which you are

> > suggesting he should simply be gifted sans an characterization,

> > any reward system or even any play.

>

>Bingo. Because that`s what blood powers are. They are innate gifts of the

>divine, not earned rewards for experience. This, obviously, is where the

>central disagreement lies.



Well, that might be what you`d like them to be, but that`s not necessarily

what they are. There are other interpretations of what blood powers are,

how and when they manifest, and if we can have rules to play them out then

it is reasonable to explore the options. Aside from that "innate" does not

mean unearned, or that there is no process involved. In a system that has

so many functions for accounting for character power it`s a good idea to

address the issue mechanically.



Most importantly, it isn`t an either/or proposition. They can still be

innate (and "unearned") gifts of the gods because by simply assigning the

template/ECL/level if the DM chooses that method. If one wants to

role-play the discovery of blood abilities and have players explore the

process by which they are gained then they can do that too.



Gary

[kgauck]

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

From: "Gary" <geeman@SOFTHOME.NET>

Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2003 1:09 AM





> the tainted, minor, major, great and true bloodline strength values

> i-which have no real functional use in the original 2e bloodline



It was possible to divine this information, and I rather think it would be

known by the geneologists and heralds of the region, so that its primary

focus was in role play. Irregardless of bloodstrength score, which I regard

as a game mechanic, the named strength a regarded mostly as a source of

prestige and honor among families. Among equal titles, the greater rank of

blood would take precidence. For non-ruling scions, the named rank as more

routine use than the score.



> Well, there wasn`t a glimmer of the idea before Savage Species came out

> that I ever recall reading, so the revelation would surprise anyone not

> familiar with that book. Hindsight now fully in place, however, what

> should really be obvious is not just that templates can be broken up into

> character classes, but that such a method offers greater opportunities for

> role-playing and character development than does simply assigning a +1 to

> +3 ECL from a template does.



In my BRCS treatment of character creation, which a few people have seen, I

broke up the goblin template this way. I had some off-list discussion with

John Machin on the utility of a goblin class based on the templates of the

three relevant creatures. My notion at the time was that if you started off

as a goblin, much like the backround class I already employ, why not advance

as a goblin as well?



> Where it`s been suggested that an approach that allows characters to

> start at 1st level will somehow "confining the character according to

> demands which are entirely external to the game" in reality the exact

> opposite is true.



Well I`d agree that its true, but I also find it undesirable. Since I

neither desire the strangely brittle 1st level character, and I prefer the

notion of the template`s inherentness, its clear why I would find a system

that expects me to accept the drawbacks without the benefits of the template

unappealing.



> Well, that might be what you`d like them to be, but that`s not necessarily

> what they are. There are other interpretations of what blood powers are,

> how and when they manifest, and if we can have rules to play them out then

> it is reasonable to explore the options.



I didn`t say don`t explore them, and I rather think my criticism encourages

that exploration. Since the last time I weighed in on this question was

April/May of 2002, I don`t think its too much of a burden.



> Aside from that "innate" does not mean unearned, or that there is no

> process involved. In a system that has so many functions for accounting

> for character power it`s a good idea to address the issue mechanically.



I rather find this notion contrary to the very idea of innate.



> Most importantly, it isn`t an either/or proposition. They can still be

> innate (and "unearned") gifts of the gods because by simply assigning the

> template/ECL/level if the DM chooses that method. If one wants to

> role-play the discovery of blood abilities and have players explore the

> process by which they are gained then they can do that too.



Well it is an either/or for specific campaigns that don`t attempt hybrid

systems. But for the community, yes, viva la difference.



Kenneth Gauck

kgauck@mchsi.com

[teloft]

Replying to Blood As Templet
______________________________________
from the Brcs

Blooded scion template
"Blooded Scion" is a template that can be added to any aberration,
animal, beast, dragon, giant, humanoid, magical beast,
monstrous humanoid, or shapechanger. The creature uses its
normal statistics, unless noted otherwise below. This template
has three variations, corresponding to the three possible bloodline
strengths of the scion: Minor, Major, or Great.

______________________________________


when I think of the blood power, I think

higlander/Starwars

the Higlander

in order to gain a new Blood abilitie of the divine blood you have to be exposed to blood alowing thet Blood abilitie.

or

kill somone with the Blood abilitie you want.

or have a cleric transfear a potion of somonse Blood abilities into your system, then fule it with your Rp.

or have a god transfear a potion of his own power / Blood abilitie into your system,
and perhaps alow him to fully fule it as well.


Im perhaps thinking somehting new here, I dont realy know.

So you have a blood potential, thet is what Blood abilities you can manifest in your person.

then you have bloodpoints, thet migth works as abilityscore.

see &#39;Table: Ability Modifiers and Bonus Spells&#39;

But I think it would be strange.

I would rather like to think of the blood score as the leadership score of the leadership Blood abilitie.


______________________________________



This is how I would like to think of begin blooded.

Here are some rules on how to make your personal Blood templet.

this templet alows some Blood abilities, depending on f.x. your family

Now here is my family, and the usualy have theees blood Blood abilities
<Blood abilitie 1> <Blood abilitie 2> <Blood abilitie 3>, and some are even known to have thees Blood abilities <Blood abilitie4> <Blood abilitie5> ...

I have some of thees Blood abilities activaided bu using blood points to activaid them.
the bloodpoint is permanetly bound to the Blood abilitie.

and my total bloodscore is the total of all my bloodpoints storde in my Blood abilities.

each Blood abilitie has a Rp storage as well.

Rp are like powersells for the Blood abilities, thet dount run out. You usualy dont spend Rp when using your Blood abilities

the Blood abilitie migth thow require some number of Rp to function, usualy the same amount as bloodpoints in thet Blood abilitie.

loosing thees Rp points will make your Blood abilitie unusable. so you can become vonurable.

as a standard evryone usualy has all there blood abilitys fuled fully with Rp.


the Blood abilitie can also have exsta stogae for Rp.

the total extra storage for Rp is your max reserv.


and I intruduce a new Blood abilitie, extra reserv.

alowing you to imbue your selfe with the trust of the land and its people, alowing you to efectively colect
Rp and store it.


______________________________________

old


Strength of blood

Tainted : lv 0

Minor : lv 1

Major : lv 2

Great : lv 3

True : lv 4

Divine : lv 5

Omnipotetial : lv 6 (your porbebly one of thows thet maid the prison named ravenloft)


24 : 1-1

28 : 1-1 2-1

36 : 1-1 2-1 3-1

40 : 1-2 2-1 3-1

44 : 1-2 2-2 3-1

52 : 1-2 2-2 3-2

56 : 1-3 2-2 3-2

...

______________________________________


Im itrudusing the 0 lv abilitys and the 4th lv abilitys

0 lv is mostly only about storing Rp, and the bloodmark.

while 4th lv is granting divine spells of low level, and some wery powerfull things.
like &#39;create portfolio&#39;
-begin able to have adept clerics and war clerics.


now the 5th level is for the graiter gods. thows thet no longer need much
holdings in terms of regents, become a force rather then begin in form.

-ability to take form to figth in person.
-one of thees abilitys would be to create the godly dimenchion for the afterlife.
-begin able to have paladins
-begin able to have normal clerics

______________________________________

Bloodranks are bloodpoints permanetly conected to this ability.

new


<Blood abilitie name> <Blood Ranks> <Rp damage> <DC>

<BloodRanks> <power awailabe>
<BloodRanks> <power awailabe>
<BloodRanks> <power awailabe>
...


______________________________________


awailable example powers

extra storing of RP
Longer life
ability to cast spells
Other <Su> or <Sp> abilitys

perhaps even some <Ex> abilitys like the paladins have. &#33;&#33;


______________________________________


without extra storing of Rp you can only stor as much Rp as your bloodscore is.

______________________________________

DC of blood ability is 10 + the level of the ability (Minor 1) + your blood ab bonus (+2) = 13

______________________________________


what are your thougths here?

[irdeggman]

Originally posted by teloft@Oct 31 2003, 07:49 AM
Replying to Blood As Templet
______________________________________
from the Brcs

Blooded scion template
"Blooded Scion" is a template that can be added to any aberration,
animal, beast, dragon, giant, humanoid, magical beast,
monstrous humanoid, or shapechanger. The creature uses its
normal statistics, unless noted otherwise below. This template
has three variations, corresponding to the three possible bloodline
strengths of the scion: Minor, Major, or Great.

______________________________________

Im perhaps thinking somehting new here, I dont realy know.

So you have a blood potential, thet is what Blood abilities you can manifest in your person.

then you have bloodpoints, thet migth works as abilityscore.

see &#39;Table: Ability Modifiers and Bonus Spells&#39;

But I think it would be strange.

I would rather like to think of the blood score as the leadership score of the leadership Blood abilitie.


______________________________________



This is how I would like to think of begin blooded.

Here are some rules on how to make your personal Blood templet.

this templet alows some Blood abilities, depending on f.x. your family

Now here is my family, and the usualy have theees blood Blood abilities
<Blood abilitie 1> <Blood abilitie 2> <Blood abilitie 3>, and some are even known to have thees Blood abilities <Blood abilitie4> <Blood abilitie5> ...

I have some of thees Blood abilities activaided bu using blood points to activaid them.
the bloodpoint is permanetly bound to the Blood abilitie.

and my total bloodscore is the total of all my bloodpoints storde in my Blood abilities.

each Blood abilitie has a Rp storage as well.

Rp are like powersells for the Blood abilities, thet dount run out. You usualy dont spend Rp when using your Blood abilities

the Blood abilitie migth thow require some number of Rp to function, usualy the same amount as bloodpoints in thet Blood abilitie.

loosing thees Rp points will make your Blood abilitie unusable. so you can become vonurable.

as a standard evryone usualy has all there blood abilitys fuled fully with Rp.


the Blood abilitie can also have exsta stogae for Rp.

the total extra storage for Rp is your max reserv.


and I intruduce a new Blood abilitie, extra reserv.

alowing you to imbue your selfe with the trust of the land and its people, alowing you to efectively colect
Rp and store it.


______________________________________

old


Strength of blood

Tainted : lv 0

Minor : lv 1

Major : lv 2

Great : lv 3

True : lv 4

Divine : lv 5

Omnipotetial : lv 6 (your porbebly one of thows thet maid the prison named ravenloft)


24 : 1-1

28 : 1-1 2-1

36 : 1-1 2-1 3-1

40 : 1-2 2-1 3-1

44 : 1-2 2-2 3-1

52 : 1-2 2-2 3-2

56 : 1-3 2-2 3-2

...

______________________________________


Im itrudusing the 0 lv abilitys and the 4th lv abilitys

0 lv is mostly only about storing Rp, and the bloodmark.

while 4th lv is granting divine spells of low level, and some wery powerfull things.
like &#39;create portfolio&#39;
-begin able to have adept clerics and war clerics.


now the 5th level is for the graiter gods. thows thet no longer need much
holdings in terms of regents, become a force rather then begin in form.

-ability to take form to figth in person.
-one of thees abilitys would be to create the godly dimenchion for the afterlife.
-begin able to have paladins
-begin able to have normal clerics

______________________________________

Bloodranks are bloodpoints permanetly conected to this ability.

new


<Blood abilitie name> <Blood Ranks> <Rp damage> <DC>

<BloodRanks> <power awailabe>
<BloodRanks> <power awailabe>
<BloodRanks> <power awailabe>
...


______________________________________


awailable example powers

extra storing of RP
Longer life
ability to cast spells
Other <Su> or <Sp> abilitys

perhaps even some <Ex> abilitys like the paladins have. &#33;&#33;


______________________________________


without extra storing of Rp you can only stor as much Rp as your bloodscore is.

______________________________________

DC of blood ability is 10 + the level of the ability (Minor 1) + your blood ab bonus (+2) = 13

______________________________________


what are your thougths here?
You know this lays out more like a class than a template. There are a few templates that grant scaling abilities based on character level, but most do not. Almost all the existing templates give the template abilities as soon as the template is gained and don&#39;t depend on character level or any other independent measure of power (like an ability score or in this case a blood score).

[teloft]

there is truth in what you say.


I can see it now.

I was clearly thinking of each of the blood abilitys as a teplet of its own acord. so efectively you gain many templets, each with its own adjustments.

but unlike levels you dont need 2nd lv here to gain acsess to 3rd lv.

it has now formalised it selfe difrently in my head.

Now I think the character has to pick all the blood abilitys he likse to have. and he can never gain a nother ability, exept by taking it from a nother, or beging given it from somone willing to surender his own skill.

when you have children, thay will not automaticly gain the same blood abilitys you have. but will have them radomly piked / or player piked, from the past 3 generations of blood. fith a few exseptions going futher back.

when you are exsposed to blood power, like when you peform a bloodthefth, you gain bloodpoints, but you also gain random blood ability.

this will alow efectiv mixing of blood abilitys. and the PC spends resourses finding a ability he has not, rather then simply try to find the next blooded NPc to peform bloodthefth from.

This will also work as a restriction on how hig blood score you can acsuly get trow ruling (converting Rp), and peforming bloodthefth on your own children.

as is it restricted by how many bloodpoints your bloodabilitys can store.

this is a nice scaling system thet alows more goodys for people with low bloodscore. And it will alow much higer blood in the god scale.

I dont like the idee of the blood class begin part of the character classes,

But I like idee of prestise classes based on the prerequised of begin blooded.

[geeman]

At 03:01 AM 10/30/2003 -0600, Kenneth Gauck wrote:



> > Aside from that "innate" does not mean unearned, or that there is no

> > process involved. In a system that has so many functions for accounting

> > for character power it`s a good idea to address the issue mechanically.

>

>I rather find this notion contrary to the very idea of innate.



Well, I`ll certainly grant that the RPG version of "innate" differs

somewhat from the Oxford dictionary definition. For instance, Cerilian

elves are innately magical in BR, but we don`t gift them with wizard or

sorcerer levels. Dwarves are innately good at crafts, but we similarly

don`t give them extra ranks to spend on those skills. Goblins are crusty,

greedy and evil, but we don`t just hand them Republican party membership

cards. Likewise, bloodlines are innate, but accounted for by ECL (or in 2e

by XP differences) which in the long run makes other game mechanics

available for use in role-playing that can have.



Gary