Chap 2 Revision

[irdeggman]

Alright, due to the imminent issue of Dragon #315 supposed with an article on this subject and the potential OGL conflict, I thought it would be best to post this now until waiting for the whole BRCS revision and a more detailed review by the development team (to correct any glaring errors). So I apologize for any of the probable glaring errors and consistencies that are in it but here is the revision to the BRCS for discussion.

I tried the best I could to incorporate the poll results (basically the favored version was Mark_Aurel's feat-like approach followed closely by the revised BRCS proposal and the other poll that basically had that people wanted variants to allow blood score to be determined randomly and non-randomly).

It took a lot of time to try and fill out the feat-like table. I hope I captured its essence. One of the concepts there was for prerequisites:

Common blood abilities: Minor Bld 20, Major Bld 24, and Great Bld 32

Rare blood abilities: Minor 24, Major 32, and Great 36

Very Rare blood abilities: Great (only) Bld 40

I tried to give more examples of created blood abilities and included 2 from the Seeking Bloodsilver adventure.

I also tried to include some guidelines for how to include domain-level based effects for blood abilities without writing them for all of them (the end product would start to get too long, IMO - it was best to just give DMs some guidelines on how to balance them and insert what they want to)

I also included more variants that I think captured many of the comments made.

Enjoy the read and give feedback :D



http://www.birthright.net/forums/index.php...e=post&id=22896 (http://www.birthright.net/forums/index.php?act=Attach&type=post&id=22896)

[Blackfrost]

Overall I felt that you did an excellent job with the revision and appreciated the many variants that you chose to include within this chapter as well as the updated descriptions of the blood abilities. My question is this: Will the rules for creating a blooded character using ECL adjustments be included in the final draft? If not, I was wondering what you might suggest as fair templates for this method. (how many bloodline points to add, ecl adjustment, etc.)

[irdeggman]

Originally posted by Blackfrost@Dec 11 2003, 02:18 PM
Overall I felt that you did an excellent job with the revision and appreciated the many variants that you chose to include within this chapter as well as the updated descriptions of the blood abilities. My question is this: Will the rules for creating a blooded character using ECL adjustments be included in the final draft? If not, I was wondering what you might suggest as fair templates for this method. (how many bloodline points to add, ecl adjustment, etc.)
I would avoid using ECL templates entirely and instead use the class levels. It is more in line with 3.5. In fact on the Wizards site they are posting class levels (or equivalent) for all ECL'd templates in the Monster Manual just to keep things consistent.

Here's the link to check it out

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/sp/20030824a

If you really want to use ECL templates then I'd just continue to use the ones in the first version of the BRCS-playtest.

Back to your question - there are no plans to include ECL templates at this time. If there is enough voiced opinions this may be reversed though.

Sorry for seeming so brash and off the cuff, if you take the templates from the BRCS-playtest and double the blood score bonuses they should work fairly well, although I still think that using level-progression is the better way to go, besides we are only talking about 2 levels vice 4 or 5.

[Blackfrost]

Yes, what you said does sound sensible. I hadn't seen that post on the Wizards site but now that I have what you've done does sound like a better alternative than ecl adjustments.

[irdeggman]

It's been a while - any feedback on this proposed revision?

[The Jew]

Overall I like it, here are few minor suggestions.

You have altered the raising/lowering the bloodscore so that they have the same cost/benefit in RP. In the BRCS raising the bloodscore cost twice as much RP as would then be recieved by lowering it. Why the change?

Resistance: Brenna gives a save bonus against magic that would constrain the scion. This is by far the weakest of all the Resistance benefits. I would suggest giving the bonus to rolls against both magical and physical restraints.

Scion levels:Vorynn gives 2-3 cantrips as a magical bonus. For a spellcaster this would be incredibly weak. I would suggest giving up that benefit and the leadership bonus and instead for each level giving for spells per day, +1 level to a spellcasting class. I thought Vorynn was the weakest of the Scion classes, and leadership is not that important to most spellcasting classes. Although, since Scry has been removed from 3.5, I would give concentration as a class skill instead. I realize scry may still have some use in BR, but it is a very weak skill and not useful for all spellcasting classes, concentration is.

Overall I think it was a great job irdeggman ;)

[irdeggman]

Originally posted by The Jew@Jan 7 2004, 12:40 AM
Overall I like it, here are few minor suggestions.

You have altered the raising/lowering the bloodscore so that they have the same cost/benefit in RP. In the BRCS raising the bloodscore cost twice as much RP as would then be recieved by lowering it. Why the change?

Resistance: Brenna gives a save bonus against magic that would constrain the scion. This is by far the weakest of all the Resistance benefits. I would suggest giving the bonus to rolls against both magical and physical restraints.

Scion levels:Vorynn gives 2-3 cantrips as a magical bonus. For a spellcaster this would be incredibly weak. I would suggest giving up that benefit and the leadership bonus and instead for each level giving for spells per day, +1 level to a spellcasting class. I thought Vorynn was the weakest of the Scion classes, and leadership is not that important to most spellcasting classes. Although, since Scry has been removed from 3.5, I would give concentration as a class skill instead. I realize scry may still have some use in BR, but it is a very weak skill and not useful for all spellcasting classes, concentration is.

Overall I think it was a great job irdeggman ;)
The RP cost for raising/lowering blood score was changed to match the 2nd ed method. The original BRCS method was modified because of the 1/2 blood score conversion.

If enough people want it changed I can change it though.

Re: Vorynn

I thought that I had caught all the references to the Scry skill - will fix it. I agree Concentration makes a good skill to replace it with.

I absolutely disagree with you assumption of the importance of the Leadership score. That is what is used to determine the level of Lts as well as bodyguards/followers, etc.

Making the class benefit +1 caster level really won't help. The assumption I am making is that most characters will start as a level of scion. Previously gained levels don't stack. So if a character starts as a scion 1 and then gains a level of wizard he wouldn't become a 2nd level wizard spellcaster.

The Vorynn scion class starts with d6 hit die which is greater than either the wizard or sorcerer classes have.

The 2 cantrips are bonus spells much like the 3.5 gnome or drow receive and don't "count" as wizard/sorcerer spells.

This scion class was designed to have an arcane caster orientation but by definition it is not limited to spellcasters hence if a scion starts with Vo scion class levels and becomes a fighter (or barbarian if a Vos) he gains arcane like abilities that are a reflection of his bloodline. Heck it even works for those who take up the cleric paths.

When compared to the other scion classes this benefit seems balanced to me without causing an increase in relative power and yet still gives something that a character would benefit from taking a class level vice some sort of level adjustment.

Again, I am not opposed to changing anything if enough people want it changed - as long as it is sonsistent with 3.5 (which all of your comments are).

Thanks for the feedback I appreciate it.

[DanMcSorley]

On Wed, 7 Jan 2004, The Jew wrote:

> You have altered the raising/lowering the bloodscore so that they have

> the same cost/benefit in RP. In the BRCS raising the bloodscore cost

> twice as much RP as would then be recieved by lowering it. Why the

> change?



That`s the original rule; the BRCS rule for raising score came from the

problem of having to multiply it by two to determine how much RP you could

collect.



It works better conceptually if it`s even, anyway; divine essence can`t be

created or destroyed, just change state and be juggled around.



--

Daniel McSorley

[Arius Vistoon]

for begin... it's a good job

ursupation :
why a non-blooded become more powerfull than the slain scion.
A non-blooded character kill a major,16 become blooded character whith major,20 !
it's strange no ?
( i suggest replace 10 by 5, also the same character in the same situation become a blooded character major,13 -> 6+7+8+9+10+11+12+13=76 left 4 which disappear ).

table ( ok, it's a detail, sorry ) :
you say for a smaller table, you delete row not usefull but row 2 at 4 ( for memory, i doesn't have table under my hand ) is not usefull because it's the same that row 1.

[Cruelsader]

It seems that I will die of old age before getting to see the whole new playtest version. :P So, I have decided to add a few minor comments on Chap 2 right now even though I do not fully understand the big picture.

The following are just minor points:

* I am not happy with the concept that 'most highborn nobles, courtiers, advisors, and government officials do not possess bloodline' This might have been the situation in early days of the empire but after 1500 years of Deismaar it seems illogical. Blood is prerequisite of effective ruling and the line between high-born nobles and rulers is vague at best. Moreover, blood is certainly prestige and it can be bought or taken by force, ie those who have power can acquire it quite easily and have motivation to do so. Therefore, I think that by HC 1524 all (significant) nobles have blood although the blood of the old (or original lines) is much stronger.

* In the 2nd ed bloodline strength was measured by a numerical score: 1-100. The bloodlines were also divided into categories - tainted, minor, major, great and true. However, the categories simply illustrated the score and had no significance of their own (save a few exceptions).

You have kept the old score system but have separated the categories. I am OK with the new concept but I find the terminology confusing. 2nd edition bloodline strength is now called bloodline score and the categories are called bloodline strength. This is somewhat misleading because bloodline score also reflects the blood's strength by determining the number of blood abilities, max RPs collected etc. It is especially confusing for those who played by the out-of-the-box 2nd ed BR rules. Also, 'bloodline score' is a technical term: in the game world the score is likely referred to as 'strength of the blood' (or something like this) adding to the confusion. In short, I recommend calling the current 'bloodline score' 'blood strength'. The new concept could be called 'bloodline purity'. Thus, a scion with Brenna-minor-50 would be described as having strong blood but impure bloodline.

* Isn't it possible to abuse the usurpation rules? Say, a male awnsegh of bloodscore 40 breeds with commoners producing offspring with bloodscore 20. Then he kills them in a violent manner getting 100 RP each time. A handy way to store RP isn't it? ;)

Overall impression: excellent work Duan! B)

P.S. I have only skimmed through the blood abilities. Once I have had closer look I may have some additional comments.

[irdeggman]

Originally posted by Cruelsader@Jan 26 2004, 03:01 PM

* I am not happy with the concept that 'most highborn nobles, courtiers, advisors, and government officials do not possess bloodline' This might have been the situation in early days of the empire but after 1500 years of Deismaar it seems illogical. Blood is prerequisite of effective ruling and the line between high-born nobles and rulers is vague at best. Moreover, blood is certainly prestige and it can be bought or taken by force, ie those who have power can acquire it quite easily and have motivation to do so. Therefore, I think that by HC 1524 all (significant) nobles have blood although the blood of the old (or original lines) is much stronger.

Actually this is extremely consistent with the 2nd ed info. There are supposed to be very few (relatively) blooded individuals and most of those are supposed to have weak bloodlines (i.e., Minor or Tainted).

Most of the positions described would not require a bloodline to perform effectively. Advisors, courtiers, and government officials would (in 2nd ed) not require a blood line in order to perform. Nobles could or could not - most of the lesser government officials (see Roesone PS for examples) had negligible bloodlines and held office by the whim of the Regent.

Blood cannot be 'bought' it must be invested or stolen. In 2nd ed it was nigh impossible for an unblooded to become blooded and almost never happened.

The Book of Regency has more info on how bloodlines have become weakened since Deismaar, IIRC.

Bottom line is that this has no impact on PCs and only affects NPCs. It is entirely possible for a DM to have every single noble in the area be blooded as well as all advisors, etc. This would just dilute the importance/significance of having a bloodline IMO though.

Thanks for the input though - I don't want to seem to be totally argumentative/defensive.

[Cruelsader]

It is difficult to say how good the abilities are without testing them in actual play. Sure, they look good! :) A few comments, though:

Alertness - 3.5. full round action is not any activity that takes one round to complete. For instance, full attack is a full round action but move + attack is not (Instead, it is a move action + a standard action).

Blood Sense - the fact that scions are fairly rare and certain derivations are very rare makes this ability rather powerful. Imagine that a PC is tracking a scion with masela major: he could pinpoint her despite disguise and through normal brick walls. I suggest putting a certain limit per day (maybe 3?). This would also make the life of DM a little easier because some players tend to overuse unlimited powers and 3+ edition detection spells are often real pain for DMs.

Charm Aura - what about neutral chracters? Can the scion use this power to detect disguised enemies? Maybe it would be easier if the ability worked as the spell? For instance, it would be possible to charm an enemy but he would get saving throw bonus. Likewise, maybe scions should not be immune but should get substantial saving throw bonus depending on the strength and purity of their blood?

Courage - virtual immunity to fear effects (whatever their DC) that extends to allies seems overpowered for a minor (major) ability. Maybe the ability should give significant saving throw bonus instead?

Divine Aura - see Charm Aura

Enhanced Sense - does magical waether phenomenon hamper the vision and hearing of masela scion?

-----I will continue once I have read other abilities------

[kgauck]

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

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

Sent: Monday, January 26, 2004 2:01 PM



> I am not happy with the concept that `most highborn nobles, courtiers,

> advisors, and government officials do not possess bloodline`



As far as `highborn nobles` I will agree that they all have bloodlines. I

think the set of highborn nobles is much smaller than the set of blooded

folk. Since "highborn" are at the top, why would they, of any of these

people, lack a bloodline? Perhaps if bloodlines were more scarce, but the

number of blooded people in any place are much laregr than the number of

provinces, so the highborn all have bloodlines. Also, since I like to have

counts and jarls as a part of the game, I need them to have bloodlines.

Courtiers, advisors, and government officials are a different story. These

folks can come from all kinds of places. They have no need to wield

regency, and could come from throughout the social strata. So, I don`t

think that courtiers, advisors, and officials have bloodlines by neccesity,

though they certainly may.



Kenneth Gauck

kgauck@mchsi.com

[kgauck]

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

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

Sent: Monday, January 26, 2004 3:55 PM





> Blood cannot be `bought` it must be invested or stolen. In 2nd ed

> it was nigh impossible for an unblooded to become blooded and

> almost never happened.



Amything can be bought. If a seller will take cash to invest you with his

bloodline, you have blood being sold. Its not a question of can. Certainly

it can happen. Its a question of will. Who will do such a thing? I say

next to no one, so its as good as irrelevant since it will not happen in any

way the players can connect with.



Kenneth Gauck

kgauck@mchsi.com

[Cruelsader]

Originally posted by irdeggman+Jan 26 2004, 10:55 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (irdeggman &#064; Jan 26 2004, 10:55 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> There are supposed to be very few (relatively) blooded individuals and most of those are supposed to have weak bloodlines (i.e., Minor or Tainted).....Bottom line is that this has no impact on PCs and only affects NPCs. It is entirely possible for a DM to have every single noble in the area be blooded as well as all advisors, etc. This would just dilute the importance/significance of having a bloodline IMO though. [/b]

I agree that it is largely a question of DM&#39;s style/vision of the world. I only mentioned it because the % of scions influences the content of rules (i.e. when scions are common quick rise of bloodline score can be expected etc) In any case, it was just a minor point.


Originally posted by irdeggman@Jan 26 2004, 10:55 PM
Actually this is extremely consistent with the 2nd ed info.

You are right I guess. Unfortunately, lot of the 2nd ed material does not make sense. :( I know you are in a difficult position: some people want you to stick to 2nd ed rules others want you to &#39;improve&#39; the rules. I am not asking to chance anything, just voiced my opinion.


Originally posted by irdeggman@Jan 26 2004, 10:55 PM
Most of the positions described would not require a bloodline to perform effectively. Advisors, courtiers, and government officials would (in 2nd ed) not require a blood line in order to perform. Nobles could or could not - most of the lesser government officials (see Roesone PS for examples) had negligible bloodlines and held office by the whim of the Regent.

IMHO this only seems so because of the very abstract nature of BR domain rules. Once you stop seeing only provinces, holdings and domain actions but instead see the &#39;real&#39; life that can be described (inadequately) by these rules the difference between a ruler and an official /advisor starts to blur.

<!--QuoteBegin-irdeggman@Jan 26 2004, 10:55 PM
Blood cannot be &#39;bought&#39; it must be invested or stolen. In 2nd ed it was nigh impossible for an unblooded to become blooded and almost never happened. [/quote]

I agree that it was rather difficult in the 2nd ed but everything had and has a price. :D (For instance, magical items were supposed to be priceless in the 2nd ed, yet they were regularly bought and sold in most games) But lets focus on the current playtest rules.

Getting bloodline is rather easy for evil characters: they simply have to murder around 10 scions. Ok, let&#39;s suppose most members of the society are reasonably moral. But then, consider a disabled penniless scion from a ruined family. He has an option of living the rest of his life as a beggar or he may give up his blood (through investiture) for, say, heal and 10, 000 gp. Would he refuse to give up his blood? Maybe but unlikely. Or another example, a non-blooded rich noble/merchant wants to get blooded. He offers 10 000 gp as a reward for a willing donor, no questions asked. How long does it take for the crime lords to organize a &#39;willing&#39; donor? Finally, I made the comment on the context of the 1500 years of development. Say we have a powerful non-blooded family and a ruler who is desperate for cash or whatever the family has. The only thing the family asks is that the ruler or one of his sons would ... and there would be blood in the next generation of the powerful family. Or the poor male can be simply charmed - not difficult at all in a magical world. Of course, it depends on the style of play but my players are mature/immoral enough to be creative and expect that they are not the sole persons in the game universe who have this trait. ;)

[Cruelsader]

Originally posted by kgauck@Jan 27 2004, 12:06 AM
Amything can be bought. If a seller will take cash to invest you with his bloodline, you have blood being sold. Its not a question of can. it can happen. Its a question of will. Who will do such a thing? I say next to no one, so its as good as irrelevant since it will not happen in any
way the players can connect with.

I agree that players cannot easily buy bloodline (or they may not be able to buy at all, depends on the DM). But players expect the world to be consistent. If it CAN happen, it has likely happened. If the interest has been very high it has happened more often. I think the interest has been very high. But this is simply my view of the BR world.

[Trithemius]

Kenneth:

> Amything can be bought. If a seller will take cash to invest you with

> his bloodline, you have blood being sold. Its not a question of can.

> Certainly it can happen. Its a question of will. Who will do such a thing?

> I say next to no one, so its as good as irrelevant since it will not happen

> in any way the players can connect with.



I`m not entirely sure about that... but I do think "buying it for your heirs"

is more likely: i.e. paying large bribes (lets not put any nice face on it,

eh?) to the parents of potential, blooded, spouses.



--

John Machin

(trithemius@paradise.net.nz)

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

"Nothing is more beautiful than to know the All."

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

- Athanasius Kircher, `The Great Art of Knowledge`.

[Cruelsader]

Additional comments on blood abilities:

Mebhaighl sense - it is not overpowered but makes DMs life difficult. I propose that the scion has to concentrate to sense casting of spells.

Poison sense - involuntary detection is tricky. The spell is instantaneous and when cast on an area detects poison within 5 foot cube. However, when this power is constantly working without concentration the area is effectively a sphere with radius of close range, i.e. much-much more powerful and also difficult for DM. I suggest that the involuntary detection works only on clearly visible creatures (such as a bystander) and objects (such as food on the table). To detect poison in an area, the scion needs to choose 5 foot cube and concentrate.

Wither touch - this seems underpowered and does not fit well into 3.5 ed. A major ability that does only d8 points of damage and d3 temporary Str damage? And a great ability that does d3 str damage, d12 points of damage + d4 damage +d2 Str damage per day? Lot of calculation but mid and high level chracters wont even notice it. OK, presumably the main power consists in an devastating ability to permanently destroy limbs (if it used against limbs). However, the concept of destroying limbs (or other organs) does not fit well into 3.5. IMO such injury would translate into permanent ability loss in DD + some penalties on certain skills. However, high level magic like greater restoration and heal should remove such afflictions.


I suggest something along the following lines instead:

Wither Touch

Level: major, great
Derivation: Azrai
The scion has the ability to cause living tissue to wilt away.

Major: once per week the scion may use this ability to desiccate and wither living tissue in contact. If the scion makes a successful melee touch attack the target living creature suffers 2d6 con and d6 strength ability drain. Half of this ability drain is permanent, other half is temporary. A successful Fortitude saving throw halves the ability damage. If a specific limb was touched this limb does not function properly (-2 all relevant skill checks) until all ability damage has been healed.

Great: same as major but all ability drain is permanent. In addition the victim must make fortitude save each day or suffer additional d4 points of permanent constitution loss. (A character slain due to such con loss becomes a shadow?)

--------

These were just minor issues, overall the work is excellent&#33;

[Cruelsader]

Originally posted by irdeggman@Dec 11 2003, 11:51 AM
Alright, due to the imminent issue of Dragon #315 supposed with an article on this subject and the potential OGL conflict, I thought it would be best to post this now

I do not read Dragon. Any comments on this article? (If the article has been discussed in these forums already , please direct me to the relevant topic.) Thank you&#33;

[geeman]

At 07:23 PM 1/27/2004 +1300, John Machin wrote:



> > Amything can be bought. If a seller will take cash to invest you with

> > his bloodline, you have blood being sold. Its not a question of can.

> > Certainly it can happen. Its a question of will. Who will do such a thing?

> > I say next to no one, so its as good as irrelevant since it will not happen

> > in any way the players can connect with.

>

>I`m not entirely sure about that... but I do think "buying it for your heirs"

>is more likely: i.e. paying large bribes (lets not put any nice face on it,

>eh?) to the parents of potential, blooded, spouses.



There is a long history of people with an economic advantage buying their

way into `society` and the titular class. In BR, there are a few things

that would make the practise less likely, and a few that would make it

more. For instance, the nature of having a bloodline in the first place

puts one in a position to earn more revenue by entering the domain level

yourself. Selling it makes less sense in comparison to a real world

equivalent because the real world equivalent doesn`t have the same actual

powers and affect at the domain level. Furthermore, unlike the real world

selling one`s bloodline represents leaving the ranks of the influential and

upper, upper classes. That`s very different from selling oneself in

marriage, or lending one`s prestige to someone, and makes it less likely IMO.



That`s not to say it absolutely wouldn`t happen, of course. Despite the

realities of certain characters getting stuck into situations in which they

would consider the option (economically, socially or otherwise) there is

some text here and there in the BR materials that describe the transfer of

bloodlines to worthy commoners. Generally, that text indicates that only

the Vos really adopt such a thing systematically--and it strikes me that

such a system might be less than voluntary on the part of the scions--but

we certainly have the example of Rogr Aglondier in Anuire to illustrate

that it must happen in other cultures. There are one or two other

considerations. In some particularly unpleasant circumstances, it`s

possible to imagine a family selling off the bloodline of a younger

offspring in order to get money "for the family". It`s also sensible that

a scion without heirs might consider the possibility of selling his

bloodline in his dotage to get money to retire on. Amongst lesser scions

(those with tainted or lower minor bloodlines) might be willing to sell

their bloodline.



Gary

[kgauck]

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

From: "John Machin" <trithemius@PARADISE.NET.NZ>

Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2004 12:23 AM





> I`m not entirely sure about that... but I do think "buying it for

> your heirs" is more likely: i.e. paying large bribes (lets not put

> any nice face on it, eh?) to the parents of potential, blooded, spouses.



This I have done outright. Wealthy up and commer seeks marriage to bankrupt

lineage of ancient honor. The difference is that the family donating the

bloodline still has it, and their decendents still have it, though it is

diluted. In my dwarven campaign of Baruk-Azhik it did it to the famed house

of Earthkore. Bain Earthkore was the Grand Judge of the realm, he tried to

get his cousin Thraim named as marshal. Thraim`s son Ulrik ended up involved

in the Rohrmarch civil war. But Bain`s other cousin (whose name I can`t

find right now - how appropriate) had married money and his heirs would be

walking around with a bloodline of 3. This last cousin`s line was the

younger son`s of a younger son. So though his patriline was nifty, his

mother and his grandmother had been lower nobility and without much blood.



I am reasonably sure I have done this again in the Taelshore, but to some

less central family.



Kenneth Gauck

kgauck@mchsi.com

[geeman]

Just for everyone`s amusement and edification on the subject, here`s an

interesting site below. I`ve got my eye on the Barony of Castle Stewart,

personally. £90,000 sounds like a bargain... though I`m sure once the BR

community sees this stuff there will be an inevitable bidding war.



http://www.baronytitles.com/forsale/



Gary

[ConjurerDragon]

Kenneth Gauck schrieb:



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

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

>Sent: Monday, January 26, 2004 3:55 PM

>

>

>

>> Blood cannot be `bought` it must be invested or stolen. In 2nd ed

>>it was nigh impossible for an unblooded to become blooded and

>>almost never happened.

>>

>>

>Amything can be bought. If a seller will take cash to invest you with his

>bloodline, you have blood being sold. Its not a question of can. Certainly

>it can happen. Its a question of will. Who will do such a thing? I say

>next to no one, so its as good as irrelevant since it will not happen in any

>way the players can connect with.

>Kenneth Gauck

>

If in real life a kidney can be bought from a poor healthy indian for a

sick millionaire then certainly there would be people ready to sell a

bloodline to a high bidder. However bloodlines are much rarer than spare

kidneys. And not only need you to have one wanting the bloodline with

enough cash/power to get his wish, and one to give away his bloodline by

free will and cash or by force - but in any case you also need a priest

to cast the spell of divestiture/investiture which requires a temple

holding and so is available to very, very few. That is from the

game-mechanical view - however in a culture in which the divine blood of

the gods flows through the veins of people I can see really no one who

would sell that. Not even a starving peasant. If you consider how much

people died in the real world for only the belief of something, then how

could in a comparable time where the blood of the gods is known to be

real, people act much different?



Such a sale if willing I would compare to the movie with Liz Hurley

"Teuflisch!" Devilish? in that a mortal human sells his soul to the devil.

bye

Michael

[ConjurerDragon]

Cruelsader 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=2132

> Cruelsader wrote:

> It is difficult to say how good the abilities are without testing them in actual play. Sure, they look good&#33; :) A few comments, though:

>

>

...



> Blood Sense - the fact that scions are fairly rare and certain derivations are very rare makes this ability rather powerful. Imagine that a PC is tracking a scion with masela major: he could pinpoint her despite disguise and through normal brick walls. I suggest putting a certain limit per day (maybe 3?). This would also make the life of DM a little easier because some players tend to overuse unlimited powers and 3+ edition detection spells are often real pain for DMs.

>

The 2E Book of Magecraft had some spells which would sound as if they

would block that ability, e.g. "Mask Bloodline" (2nd level) or "Disguise

Bloodline" (5th level) illusion spells so available not only to wizards

but also to Magicians). In addition the 3E Dungeon Masters guide

provides on p. 109 a nice example of a "lead-lined door" which provides

a "barrier against many detection spells". A DM could simply rule that

the Blood Sense abiltiy can be fooled by those spells and blocked by

mundane manners like this door and the ability would be far less powerful.



> Courage - virtual immunity to fear effects (whatever their DC) that extends to allies seems overpowered for a minor (major) ability. Maybe the ability should give significant saving throw bonus instead?

>

>

Overpowered for a major ability? Even the normal 3E Paladin gets his

Aura of Courage which makes himself immune to fear and gives allies

within 10 feet a +4 morale bonus on saves. Why would it be overpowered

as a major power for you?

bye

Michael

[Cruelsader]

Comments on ConjurerDragon comments:

Blood sense
There are certainly a number of ways to fool the sense. First, special spells like Mask Bloodline (which were incorporated into the first version of the playtest) can disguise blood. Also, the ability description states that it works like Detetc Magic. So, thin sheet of lead or one foot of stone etc would block it. However, few scions can cast disguising spells. Second, bloodlines are far rarer than magic. So, if you can detect a bloodline you can often pinpoint a specific individual. Most importantly, however, some players use unlimited abilities a lot. Imagine the poor DM when a player insists constantly detecting bloodlines in a city - lots of scions and barriers to take into account. In my experience the problem can simply be solved by limiting the power to certain times per day. The result is that most players save the uses to be sure that they have them when they truly need them.

Aura of Courage
I thought that it is overpowered because a lot of undead use fear as special attack and because I overlooked the Paladin&#39;s ability. (Don&#39;t have paladins in my campaign but a different class: holy warriors) I agree now that the ability is not overpowered for a standard 3.5.E game. My apologies for the confusion.

[Benjamin]

Originally posted by Cruelsader+Jan 27 2004, 10:13 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Cruelsader @ Jan 27 2004, 10:13 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-irdeggman@Dec 11 2003, 11:51 AM
Alright, due to the imminent issue of Dragon #315 supposed with an article on this subject and the potential OGL conflict, I thought it would be best to post this now*

I do not read Dragon. Any comments on this article? (If the article has been discussed in these forums already , please direct me to the relevant topic.) Thank you&#33; [/b][/quote]
I wrote up a synopsis on this article in another section of the forums.

Dragon 315 link (http://www.birthright.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=2130)

[irdeggman]

Originally posted by Cruelsader@Jan 26 2004, 03:01 PM

* In the 2nd ed bloodline strength was measured by a numerical score: 1-100. The bloodlines were also divided into categories - tainted, minor, major, great and true. However, the categories simply illustrated the score and had no significance of their own (save a few exceptions).

You have kept the old score system but have separated the categories. I am OK with the new concept but I find the terminology confusing. 2nd edition bloodline strength is now called bloodline score and the categories are called bloodline strength. This is somewhat misleading because bloodline score also reflects the blood&#39;s strength by determining the number of blood abilities, max RPs collected etc. It is especially confusing for those who played by the out-of-the-box 2nd ed BR rules. Also, &#39;bloodline score&#39; is a technical term: in the game world the score is likely referred to as &#39;strength of the blood&#39; (or something like this) adding to the confusion. In short, I recommend calling the current &#39;bloodline score&#39; &#39;blood strength&#39;. The new concept could be called &#39;bloodline purity&#39;. Thus, a scion with Brenna-minor-50 would be described as having strong blood but impure bloodline.

Actually in the original material (see BR Rulebook pg 20 and the Book of Regency pg 16+) bloodline was defined exactly in the same manner as it is in the revised Chapt 2.

Strength was a word (tainted, minor, major, great or true)

Score was a numerical value used as a rules mechanic.

The major difference in the BRCS is that bloodline strength now determines the level (minor, major or great) of blood abilities a scion is eligible for. This was done to be consistent with 3/3.5 and to provide some manner of measuring relative power between scions.

[irdeggman]

Alertness - 3.5. full round action is not any activity that takes one round to complete. For instance, full attack is a full round action but move + attack is not (Instead, it is a move action + a standard action).


Good point, I&#39;ll add that full round action is a standard action and a move action.



Blood Sense - the fact that scions are fairly rare and certain derivations are very rare makes this ability rather powerful. Imagine that a PC is tracking a scion with masela major: he could pinpoint her despite disguise and through normal brick walls. I suggest putting a certain limit per day (maybe 3?). This would also make the life of DM a little easier because some players tend to overuse unlimited powers and 3+ edition detection spells are often real pain for DMs.


This one was an example of a created blood ability and is not a standard one.

There is a limit listed - see the last line of the description "This ability is usable once per day."



Charm Aura - what about neutral chracters? Can the scion use this power to detect disguised enemies? Maybe it would be easier if the ability worked as the spell? For instance, it would be possible to charm an enemy but he would get saving throw bonus. Likewise, maybe scions should not be immune but should get substantial saving throw bonus depending on the strength and purity of their blood?


It does work exactly like the spells referenced, with the exception of DC modifier and caster level. If a character is non-hostile that covers neutral ones, I do believe. Hence all poossible categories of encounters are indeed covered. As far as scions being immune - that was how the 2nd ed ability worked.

How can any of the spells referenced be used to detect an enemy, really. It is the non-scion&#39;s attitude at the moment the ability is used. The affected is either hostile or not.



Divine Aura - see Charm Aura



Same as charm aura above



Enhanced Sense - does magical waether phenomenon hamper the vision and hearing of masela scion?


Good point it should penetrate all weather conditions. But I don&#39;t really see magical weather phenomenon occuring all that frequently in a campaign.

[irdeggman]

Mebhaighl sense - it is not overpowered but makes DMs life difficult. I propose that the scion has to concentrate to sense casting of spells.


This version works pretty much the same way as does the one listed in the Book of Regency. Just because a scion can sense an arcane spell being cast doesn&#39;t mean he knows from where it is coming or who is casting it.



Poison sense - involuntary detection is tricky. The spell is instantaneous and when cast on an area detects poison within 5 foot cube. However, when this power is constantly working without concentration the area is effectively a sphere with radius of close range, i.e. much-much more powerful and also difficult for DM. I suggest that the involuntary detection works only on clearly visible creatures (such as a bystander) and objects (such as food on the table). To detect poison in an area, the scion needs to choose 5 foot cube and concentrate.


One of the reasons that this was made a minor vice a major ability was the frequency of it being used. It should not be that common for a scion to encounter poisons. Unlike, say healing which can reasonably be expected to be used in any adventure.




Wither touch - this seems underpowered and does not fit well into 3.5 ed. A major ability that does only d8 points of damage and d3 temporary Str damage? And a great ability that does d3 str damage, d12 points of damage + d4 damage +d2 Str damage per day? Lot of calculation but mid and high level chracters wont even notice it. OK, presumably the main power consists in an devastating ability to permanently destroy limbs (if it used against limbs). However, the concept of destroying limbs (or other organs) does not fit well into 3.5. IMO such injury would translate into permanent ability loss in DD + some penalties on certain skills. However, high level magic like greater restoration and heal should remove such afflictions.


I think you nailed the reason that the ability is not underpowered - it requires the affected limb to be removed (preventing the spread of the withering) or have the affected one to be cured by a healing that is acapable of healing at least 25 hit points within 2d4 days or the effect is permanent.

Let&#39;s see if Str goes to 0 then the victim lays helpless on the ground. Losing 1d8 (halved) could have devasting effect on a character, even high level ones. Warriors&#39; melee attacks are lessoned and spellcasters could actually end up laying helpless on the ground -although they probably have greater than a 4 Str, but they could end up being overburdened because they can&#39;t carry what they had before, this could also affect those in heavy armors.

The great version requires saves every day in order to avoid increased damage.

Blood abilities aren&#39;t supposed to provide an instant kill but rather add something to a scion&#39;s arsenal. I don&#39;t know it still seems to be on the balanced side at the moment, but I&#39;m open to changes if enough people want them.

[Cruelsader]

Originally posted by irdeggman@Jan 29 2004, 09:48 PM
There is a limit listed - see the last line of the description "This ability is usable once per day."

:blink: No idea how I managed to overlook it.... Sorry.


Charm Aura - It does work exactly like the spells referenced, with the exception of DC modifier and caster level.*

It doesn&#39;t. The spells have different range and number of targets but most importantly they do not distinguish between friends and foes. You may scare your friends and you may charm your enemies (however if you are charming an enemy and you or your allies are hostile toward him he gets saving throw bonus). According to the descirption of the blood ability, however, you may only charm non-hostile creatures and you can scare only your enemies.


* How can any of the spells referenced be used to detect an enemy, really.* It is the non-scion&#39;s attitude at the moment the ability is used.* The affected is either hostile or not.

Maybe it is the question of my inadequate language skill (English is not my native language). I thought that all enemies are hostile even when they pretend to be friends. So you could identify an enemy because he would be the only one to run away scared when you use the blood ability.


* As far as scions being immune - that was how the 2nd ed ability worked.

OK. Keeping in line with 2nd ed as much as possible is probably good idea.



Good point it should penetrate all weather conditions. But I don&#39;t really see magical weather phenomenon occuring all that frequently in a campaign.

Realm spells? (Ward, for instance)

[Cruelsader]

Originally posted by irdeggman@Jan 29 2004, 10:19 PM
Mebhaighl sense - Just because a scion can sense an arcane spell being cast doesn&#39;t mean he knows from where it is coming or who is casting it.

The description of the ability states that the scion with minor ability can sense the general direction of the casting and with major ability also automatically knows the school of the spell. I would not want to be the DM in a game where a PC with this ability walks around in a big city... :P



Poison sense -* One of the reasons that this was made a minor vice a major ability was the frequency of it being used.* It should not be that common for a scion to encounter poisons.* Unlike, say healing which can reasonably be expected to be used in any adventure.

Although I said the blood ability is much more powerful than the spell I wasn&#39;t much concerned about it being too powerful. What did concern me was that this ability, as all automatic or unlimited detection abilities, creates extra (and usually not rewarding) work for DM.


Wither touch - Let&#39;s see if Str goes to 0 then the victim lays helpless on the ground.* Losing 1d8 (halved) could have devasting effect on a character, even high level ones.*

Failed fort save v DC 15 results in half d8 Str dmg - you call it devastating? :huh: Well, it depends how to define &#39;a high level character&#39; and whether the campaign is default D&D or not. In default D&D you have a cleric in the party. A cleric can cast lesser restoration at the 3rd level (it is a second level spell). Half of an average d8 roll is 2,25. Lesser restoration cures d4 points of ability damage, average roll is 2,5. And this is just a third level party.... Higher level party has much more powerful healing magic available and they would make the save most of the time anyway. In short, I am of the opinion that for high or even mid level PCs the effect of this major blood ability is very minor inconvenience.


Warriors&#39; melee attacks are lessoned and spellcasters could actually end up laying helpless on the ground -although they probably have greater than a 4 Str, but they could end up being overburdened because they can&#39;t carry what they had before, this could also affect those in heavy armors.

Half of average d8 roll is not 4 but 2,25. This means only -1 to strength. Besides, fighters have high fort save bonus so they are more likely to escape the effects altogether.


I think you nailed the reason that the ability is not underpowered - it requires the affected limb to be removed (preventing the spread of the withering) or have the affected one to be cured by a healing that is acapable of healing at least 25 hit points within 2d4 days or the effect is permanent.

IMHO you should not use such effects in 3.5.e because they do not fit at all. Damage in D&D is abstract measured either in hit points or ability damage. For instance, limbs are not hacked off in a normal combat nor are there healing spells such as &#39;restore severed limb&#39;. If you want to have this very special withering effect then you should clearly state that after certain time it is not possible to restore the limb with any kind of healing magic (even true resurrection). If you do not want the effect to be so extreme you should state what healing magic is enough to cure the disability. For instance, would heal restore the limb? Also, you should describe how the withered limb affects character abilities. IMO it is not worth the trouble. It seems much simpler to use permanent ability damage (which isn&#39;t that permanent if you have magic available) and increase it to a level where it can be severly disabling but is rarely fatal.

----

Let me assure once more that although my critics may seem harsh I think that Chap 2 is well written and I appreciate very much that you are doing it of your free time.

[Cruelsader]

Originally posted by irdeggman+Jan 29 2004, 09:35 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (irdeggman &#064; Jan 29 2004, 09:35 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Cruelsader@Jan 26 2004, 03:01 PM

* In the 2nd ed bloodline strength was measured by a numerical score: 1-100. The bloodlines were also divided into categories - tainted, minor, major, great and true. However, the categories simply illustrated the score and had no significance of their own (save a few exceptions).

You have kept the old score system but have separated the categories. I am OK with the new concept but I find the terminology confusing. 2nd edition bloodline strength is now called bloodline score and the categories are called bloodline strength. This is somewhat misleading because bloodline score also reflects the blood&#39;s strength by determining the number of blood abilities, max RPs collected etc. It is especially confusing for those who played by the out-of-the-box 2nd ed BR rules. Also, &#39;bloodline score&#39; is a technical term: in the game world the score is likely referred to as &#39;strength of the blood&#39; (or something like this) adding to the confusion. In short, I recommend calling the current &#39;bloodline score&#39; &#39;blood strength&#39;. The new concept could be called &#39;bloodline purity&#39;. Thus, a scion with Brenna-minor-50 would be described as having strong blood but impure bloodline.

Actually in the original material (see BR Rulebook pg 20 and the Book of Regency pg 16+) bloodline was defined exactly in the same manner as it is in the revised Chapt 2.

Strength was a word (tainted, minor, major, great or true)

Score was a numerical value used as a rules mechanic. [/b][/quote]

Exactly. The score was a numerical rules mechanical value while the word was used for convenience or to express the strength of the bloodline in the gameworld. If scion&#39;s bloodscore changed significantly the word to describe it - tainted, minor, major, great, true - also changed. However, this is no longer the case.


The major difference in the BRCS is that bloodline strength now determines the level (minor, major or great) of blood abilities a scion is eligible for. This was done to be consistent with 3/3.5 and to provide some manner of measuring relative power between scions.

The difference is indeed major. The word no longer relates to the score, it has a meaning of its own in mechanical rules. In addition to determining what abilities a scion can have it also determines the strength of the blood in scion&#39;s offspring. (The weaker of the two parents). The difference beteen the new and 2nd ed system is fundamental. I am not against the new concept, actually I quite like it. However, I think it should be clearly distinguished from the old bloodline strength. I proposed that the score would be called blood strength while the minor/major... would be called blood(line) purity.

[irdeggman]

Actually in the 2nd ed material it was possible for a scion to have a tainted bloodline with a higher score than a scion with a great bloodline. Check the random tables to ensure my math is correct.

The way a scion increased his bloodline strength was by raising the score to higher than the maximum a starting scion could have (based on Table 10 of the BR Rulebook) with at least a gain of 10 points and then had to perfrom a great act (determined by the DM). Also this could only happen once in a character&#39;s lifetime. All of this is from the BoR.

Again, raising a scion&#39;s bloodscore did not automatically raise his strength.

The rules presented in the revised Chap 2 are pretty much the exact same ones in the BoR concerning how to raise a scion&#39;s blood strength.

The tie in between blood score and strength in 2nd ed was superficial at best. In the BRCS (used to describe the revised Chap 2 also) it is much tighter and more clearly defined.

As far as withered touch goes

It does say that the magic must be used within a certain amount of time or the effect is permanent.

Regeneration (per PHB pg 312, pg 270 (Spell Regenerate); DMG pg 298 and MM pg 314) all describe the restoration of severed body parts. So this is indeed a 3.5 concept. Now, the D&D rules don&#39;t really seem to address an effect of having a severed limb - but the BRCS is consistent at least (and will scale automatically when the core rules change). But I would assume that some of the effects are rather obvious, a creature can&#39;t use anything that requires 2 hands to use, can&#39;t use both a shield and weapon, can&#39;t use any type of 2 weapon attacks, etc.

As far as Poison sense goes - remember this ability is only available to those with Azrai derivation. Most player&#39;s won&#39;t take that derivation, unless they want to play a PC with tendencies towards evil (at least non-good ones). If this is the case then teh DM has built in difficulties already.

[camelotcrusade]

I&#39;m still relatively new here but happily running a campaign with the BRCS put out by this site.

However, I think I totally missed the debate about some of the features in this revision. Of most interest to me is the apparent throwback to the 2nd edition manangement of blood score.

If I&#39;m reading this right, then everybody&#39;s score is going back to being from 1-100, and then you only collect this number of points? I&#39;d just like a few guidelines on what we need to do to convert from the system we have now (scores are halved, to increase it you need to spend 4x the score in RP, and reserve is 4x score) to whatever it is now (evidently score=score, reserve is x2 and you spend 1 for 1 plus an additional point to increase your bloodline).

Is that all I have to do? If so it sound easy and will make it easier to "port" over 2nd edition npcs. If not please let me know what I&#39;m missing.

Also, now that it&#39;s much easier to increase your blooline (now it sounds exactly like it was in the computer game, 1 for 1, add +1 and you&#39;re done) does anyone else think that the paragraph about how it almost never happens need to be reworked? In my experience, scions with weak blood strength (for example, minor whatever, score 15) tend to avoid spending undue regency and focus on getting by without whenever they can. As such, they tend to build it up in reserve fairly quickily, especially if the make it a priority to increase their blood strength. What I&#39;m getting at is that I think scions with a stronger blood strength are the ones who may never seen an increase vs. somebody like poor Razzik Fanggrabber of Markazor back in 2nd edition, who had a score of Azarai, tainted, TWO. Believe me, if I played her, I wouldn&#39;t use a scrap of regency until I have clawed my way up to at least a 8 or 9. :)

Finally, why is the reserve so low? This means that regents with higher bloodlines will be much more effective bullies, doesn&#39;t it?

camelotcrusade

I&#39;m anxious to dig into this and see what else is new.

Edit:

I agree with the complaints that Vorynn doesn&#39;t get anything fun for the scion, and I think I will implement the following:
Scions of Vorynn are instinctively in tune with magical energies. As such, they may either cast spells with an effective +1 level to an existing spellcasting class, or choose to manifest sorcererous abilities. Choosing the latter entitles them to learn 2 sorcerer cantrips at first level of the scion class and one 1st level sorcerer spell at 2nd level of the scion class. These spells are treated as blood abilities (See “using Blood Abilities” in this manual) and are usable once per day.

[irdeggman]

Someone proposed having a document with applicable links to thread discussions for ready reference.

Well I went through the BRCS comments board and listed links to all pertenant thread topics. I did not put in summaries I only put in in the thread topic, sorry but I&#39;m old and tired. I hope this helps in trying to research past discussions. The links are in reverse order, the last thread started is the first on the list.

Chap 2 update:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=2012


New Powers:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=1889


Chap 2 Blood Score Proposals (Revised):
http://www.birthright.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=1815


Bloodline Powers Expansion:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=1896


Bloodline Abilities:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=1830


Chapter 2 Bloodline Score Proposals:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=1613


2e Bloodlines in 3e style:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=1375


More Ranting Against the Bloodline Stat:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=1445


Poll Chap 2 Blood Abilities:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=1646


Chap 2 Even More Polls:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=1645


Feat/Skill Based Scion:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=1578


Make Scion a Class:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=1472


Balanced Scions:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=1589


5 level scion class:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=1577


My ECL playtest results:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=1560


New Versions of Blood abilities:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=1483


Chapter 2 Poll 3 ECLS:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=1418


Proposal an alternate bloodline system:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=1464


Chapter 2 ECLs:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=1468


Refocusing the bloodline discussion:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=1439


Bloodline:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=1429


Stat point balanced bloodline score:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=1438


Instead of a 7th ability score:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=1437


Bloodline suggestions:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=1441


Draft 0.0 Blood Abilities and Templates:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=1425


Chapter 2 poll 2 scion templates:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=1417


Chapter 2 poll:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=1416


Bloodtheft:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=1395


Bloodlines and casting divine spells without gods:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=1383


Level dependent blood abilities:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=1361


Chapter 2 Blood Abilities:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=1334


Level Dependent blood abilities:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=1360


Tainted Bloodline:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=1266


Chapter 2 bloodline saving throws:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=1282


BRCS Chapter 2 the bloodline:
http://www.birthright.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=1275

[ConjurerDragon]

camelotcrusade 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=2132

> camelotcrusade wrote:

>

...



> Also, now that it`s much easier to increase your blooline (now it sounds exactly like it was in the computer game, 1 for 1, add +1 and you`re done) does anyone else think that the paragraph about how it almost never happens need to be reworked? In my experience, scions with weak blood strength (for example, minor whatever, score 15) tend to avoid spending undue regency and focus on getting by without whenever they can. As such, they tend to build it up in reserve fairly quickily, especially if the make it a priority to increase their blood strength. What I`m getting at is that I think scions with a stronger blood strength are the ones who may never seen an increase vs. somebody like poor Razzik Fanggrabber of Markazor back in 2nd edition, who had a score of Azarai, tainted, TWO. Believe me, if I played her, I wouldn`t use a scrap of regency until I have clawed my way up to at least a 8 or 9. :)

>camelotcrusade

>I`m anxious to dig into this and see what else is new.

>

A regent can save his whole RP income only if he faces no threats he has

to counter. Especially a goblin regent would be likely to get a great

captain as his "random event" which has to be dealt with. Add only a few

Contests from hostile regents which you do not spend RP against and you

soon will either lose your RP producing base or will have to spend RP to

protect your holdings and be unable to save it all up.



And even if you would be able by some miracle to save all your RP up,

without that even one of your enemys takes advantage of it, then the

investment in bloodline of RP equal to bloodline +1 does not pay off

soon. The gain is only 1 additional RP gained, so it takes 3 domain

turns to gain back the RP you have to spend to raise the 2E bloodline of

2 of Queen Fanggrabber to 3. And it takes then 4 domain turns to gain

back the investment to raise it to 4 - all the while you have no RP to

spare for anything else...



For most PBEMS the game would end before you reach your stated goal of 8

or 9 bloodline, it would be 3+4+5+6+7+8 domain turns 33 domain turns

before bloodline 8 and 42 domain turns before 9 if you save up every

single RP.



I would assume that the puppet regents in Markazor and Mur-Kilad have so

low bloodlines because they are replaced every time the Gorgon is not

satisfied with something. The combined army does not train enough? New

regent for Markazor... ;-)



With that sort of threat in your back you WILL have to spend RP to

ensure that everything runs smooth to not provoke the Gorgon´s wrath...

bye

Michael

[camelotcrusade]

irdeggman, that&#39;s a great post... perhaps you could get it stickied somewhere for the newbies or people who missed out on those discussions?

Michael, I see what you mean, I&#39;m always thinking in terms of the computer game, where&#39;s very easy to do, rather than in some other format (I&#39;m just getting used to pnp now). How does a game "end," anyway... when your regent dies??

[irdeggman]

If I&#39;m reading this right, then everybody&#39;s score is going back to being from 1-100, and then you only collect this number of points? I&#39;d just like a few guidelines on what we need to do to convert from the system we have now (scores are halved, to increase it you need to spend 4x the score in RP, and reserve is 4x score) to whatever it is now (evidently score=score, reserve is x2 and you spend 1 for 1 plus an additional point to increase your bloodline).

Is that all I have to do? If so it sound easy and will make it easier to "port" over 2nd edition npcs. If not please let me know what I&#39;m missing.


To convert from the BRCS-playtest to the revised Chapt 2, just double the blood score. That should put you at the right spot. Don&#39;t worry about RP reserves, they should have taken care of themselves.



Finally, why is the reserve so low? This means that regents with higher bloodlines will be much more effective bullies, doesn&#39;t it?


Yes. They always were and still are. They have greater bloodscores and hence have the ability to draw from a greater amount of resources than a regent with a lower blood score. This is basically the same as it always was, with the exception of the max RP pool which was a new concept for the BRCS.



I agree with the complaints that Vorynn doesn&#39;t get anything fun for the scion, and I think I will implement the following:
Scions of Vorynn are instinctively in tune with magical energies. As such, they may either cast spells with an effective +1 level to an existing spellcasting class, or choose to manifest sorcererous abilities. Choosing the latter entitles them to learn 2 sorcerer cantrips at first level of the scion class and one 1st level sorcerer spell at 2nd level of the scion class. These spells are treated as blood abilities (See “using Blood Abilities” in this manual) and are usable once per day.


Casting with an effective +1 level to an existing spellcasting level? What does this mean. Domain granted abilities have casting spells of the domain at +1 caster level. Some prestige classes have a class ability of +1 to existing spellcaster level. But these are two very different things. The prestige class ability actually adds a caster level, so a 2nd level wizard with a prestige class that grants +1 level to an existing spellcaster class can now cast spells as if a 3rd level wizard, which means he gains 2nd level spells and can add spells to his spell book - basically anything that is spellcaster level dependent is increased.

Nothing grants a +1 to caster level for all spells cast which is what the other way of reading this statement amounts to. This interpretation is far too powerful.

[ConjurerDragon]

camelotcrusade 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=2132

>...

> Michael, I see what you mean, I`m always thinking in terms of the computer game, where`s very easy to do, rather than in some other format (I`m just getting used to pnp now). How does a game "end," anyway... when your regent dies??

>

The game may or may not end on several occasions.

Most often Play by Email Games end when the GameMaster or his players

lose interest in the game and wander off, or are hindered in their wish

to continue playing by such mundane things as real life issues ;-)

From the view that the "Book of Regency" offers, a free 2E book which

you can download from Wizards of the Coast, the game need not to end

with the death of a regent - his heir can take over and the player

continue to play the heir. Establishing a Dynastie is helpful to

continue the rule without that the hard conquered realm is diminished

every time it´s regent dies and no clear heir is available.

bye

Michael

[Osprey]

A regent can save his whole RP income only if he faces no threats he has
to counter. Especially a goblin regent would be likely to get a great
captain as his "random event" which has to be dealt with. Add only a few
Contests from hostile regents which you do not spend RP against and you
soon will either lose your RP producing base or will have to spend RP to
protect your holdings and be unable to save it all up.
ConjurerDragon

By the book (BRCS, at least), random events happen only 3 out of 10 seasons on average. So why do you assume that every regent would or should have more problems than they know what to do with? I think it isn&#39;t sound policy to assume that a typical DM in Birthright will assign more than average problems for PC regents. It certainly is a style and tendency for some of the more vocal DM posters on this site (all the way down to exclusively adventure-scale play of domain actions). Which is fine, every DM has a different style, but one must assume that there will be a fair number of DM&#39;s who play by the book regarding random events, which means random events only about once (maybe twice) per year, on average. And why assume that most realms are constant hotbeds of contested holdings, warfare, and /or intrigue? Sure, every regent is looking for an advantage, but they&#39;re not ALL ambitious, power-hungry, and expansionistic. If they were, Anuire would be a much more embroiled, war-torn, and decimated place.


Casting with an effective +1 level to an existing spellcasting level? What does this mean. Domain granted abilities have casting spells of the domain at +1 caster level. Some prestige classes have a class ability of +1 to existing spellcaster level. But these are two very different things. The prestige class ability actually adds a caster level, so a 2nd level wizard with a prestige class that grants +1 level to an existing spellcaster class can now cast spells as if a 3rd level wizard, which means he gains 2nd level spells and can add spells to his spell book - basically anything that is spellcaster level dependent is increased.

Nothing grants a +1 to caster level for all spells cast which is what the other way of reading this statement amounts to. This interpretation is far too powerful. irdeggman

How about a blood ability of Vorynn like Arcane Might, adding +1/2/3 (Mi/Ma/Gr) (or +1 caster level for a Major power, +2 for a Great pwer if the first example is considered too potent) to an arcane spellcaster&#39;s caster level when determining damage, range, spell penetration, and all of the other caster level-dependent effects of arcane spells? Such a blood ability would specifically state that it does NOT grant additional spells per level (as I wholeheartedly agree that this is far too powerful). I don&#39;t mind such a thing so long as it is a Vorynn-derived blod ability (and not inherent to a general scion class which is made cooler if you&#39;re a scion of Vorynn).

-Osprey

[irdeggman]

By the book (BRCS, at least), random events happen only 3 out of 10 seasons on average. So why do you assume that every regent would or should have more problems than they know what to do with? I think it isn&#39;t sound policy to assume that a typical DM in Birthright will assign more than average problems for PC regents. It certainly is a style and tendency for some of the more vocal DM posters on this site (all the way down to exclusively adventure-scale play of domain actions). Which is fine, every DM has a different style, but one must assume that there will be a fair number of DM&#39;s who play by the book regarding random events, which means random events only about once (maybe twice) per year, on average. And why assume that most realms are constant hotbeds of contested holdings, warfare, and /or intrigue? Sure, every regent is looking for an advantage, but they&#39;re not ALL ambitious, power-hungry, and expansionistic. If they were, Anuire would be a much more embroiled, war-torn, and decimated place.

I believe that people are refering to more than random events when they talk about a regent having more problems to deal with than he knows what to do. Contesting actions are not considered random events. IMO they ahppen a lot more frequently than not, especially if the defending regent has spread hmself thin in a wide range of locations/holdings or his a powerful or weak regent (the average regent is mostly ignored than the easy victims (weak regents) or the king of the hill (strong ones).

Wars are another example of an event that demands a regents attentinw that does not fall under the random events table.

And Anuire is a very embroiled and war-torn place. Wars and threats of wars are very much a part of everyday life for the average landed regent as is the manipulations for the Iron Throne. Take a look at Ghoere and Osoerde for examples of potential wars - they border on many potentially affected provinces. The Spiderfell is the source of frequent raids to surrounded lands.
Diemed is still shaking from the loss of Modeore and ancestrally Endier so there is the plans to reclaim his proper heritage.

There is the conflict between Boerone and Avan and their manipulations against each other for the Iron Throne - these will definitely affect regents in the area.

Don&#39;t forget about the political struggles between the different sects of churches of the same faith, let alone those in opposition to each other.

Oh and then there are the guilders who constantly are competing against each other for economic dominance.

Nope, nothing is simple in Anuire (or Cerilia for that matter) and that is what makes the campaign so exciting to play.

Note that none of the above events are considered "random" per the random events tables.





How about a blood ability of Vorynn like Arcane Might, adding +1/2/3 (Mi/Ma/Gr) (or +1 caster level for a Major power, +2 for a Great pwer if the first example is considered too potent) to an arcane spellcaster&#39;s caster level when determining damage, range, spell penetration, and all of the other caster level-dependent effects of arcane spells? Such a blood ability would specifically state that it does NOT grant additional spells per level (as I wholeheartedly agree that this is far too powerful). I don&#39;t mind such a thing so long as it is a Vorynn-derived blod ability (and not inherent to a general scion class which is made cooler if you&#39;re a scion of Vorynn).

-Osprey

I would scale this up and make it +1 effective casting level for a major and +2 for a great with no minor ability, otherwise it is way unbalanced with other minor abilities. This could be a decent variant (i.e, created) blood ability, but I am strongly opposed to including any &#39;new&#39; blood abilities in the core rules. There needs to be a baseline and the blood abilities presented in the 2nd ed rules are that basis.

[Elton Robb]

New Feat
Blooded Scion [General]
You have the blood of the old gods running through your veins.
Prerequisite: None
Benefit: Character is considered a scion and can have a blood score and subsequent blood abilities.

Irdeggman, having a prequisite of "none" is a bit to giving, do you think? The prerequisite should be: taken at character creation or bloodtheft. What do you think?

[Osprey]

As a Birthright DM, one of the issues I struggle with is the time scale. It&#39;s been over 550 years since the Empire crumbled, yet there&#39;s still a complete lack of stability???

I think such a state is possible only with some stability - which means every regent and his mother can&#39;t be constantly contesting other regents. In such a climate, powerhouses like Darien Avan would have overwhelmed the opposition centuries ago.

In the Book of Regency they describe Anuireans as a somewhat conservative, backward-looking group, yearning for "the good old days" of empire. In other words, yearning for stability and peace. Granted, they yearn because the grass is greener back there, but still...this kind of cultural trait seems to lend itself to keeping things the way they are in preference to constant ambition, struggle, and the chaos that ensues.

I see "modern" Anuire as a a blend of relatively un-ambitious status quo regents like the Mhor, Elinie, Taeghas, and Aerenwe, along with the ambitious and expansionistic regents like Avan, Boeruine, Gavin Tael, Hierl Diem, and Eriene Mierelen(sp?) of Brosengae...

Besides, with a few decent alliances and some strong military backing, there&#39;s no reason why certain regions of Anuire (in my game, it&#39;s the Southern Coast realms - Roesone, Medoere, Ilien, Aerenwe, and a Moergan-ruled Osoerde - who form a mutual defense alliance after restoring Osoerde to William Moergen and crushing Diemed in a fast but decisive war). All of this through about 3 years of game time, meaning stability isn&#39;t necessarilly far away or impossibly out of reach for PC regents.


Of course, given a few years to pump up their power and bloodlines, these regents are making bigger and bigger targets for the powerful regents like Avan (Gavin Tael already tried to break Roesone once, and failed miserably), and especially the blood-hungry Gorgon...

-Osprey

[ConjurerDragon]

Osprey 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=2132

>

> Osprey wrote:

> As a Birthright DM, one of the issues I struggle with is the time scale. It`s been over 550 years since the Empire crumbled, yet there`s still a complete lack of stability???

>

>

How long was the time of the Interregnum after the last Staufers died

out and before the Habsburgers started to become Emperors of Germany?

bye

Michael

[irdeggman]

Originally posted by Elton Robb@Feb 4 2004, 05:32 PM

New Feat
Blooded Scion [General]
You have the blood of the old gods running through your veins.
Prerequisite: None
Benefit: Character is considered a scion and can have a blood score and subsequent blood abilities.

Irdeggman, having a prequisite of "none" is a bit to giving, do you think? The prerequisite should be: taken at character creation or bloodtheft. What do you think?
Not really.

There are plenty of feats with no prerequisites. If a character uses one of his very precious feats (only 1 every 3rd level after all) in order to take this feat it seems to me that he is giving up something of real value that he can&#39;t use to further his character (class wise). This is not a fighter, wizard or other class-bonus feat so a character would have to use one of his character level feats to obtain it.

Prerequisite of bloodtheft is really restrictive and wouldn&#39;t account for investiture like Aglondier received.

This is surprisingly (alright not too surprising since many people have talked about requiring a character to spend a feat to be blooded for a very long time on the boards) similar to the Dragon Article (which I hated by the way) which has a real similar feat (with no prerequisite either).

This is also a variant and not a default mode for the BRCS.

[kgauck]

> Osprey wrote:

> As a Birthright DM, one of the issues I struggle with is the time

> scale. It`s been over 550 years since the Empire crumbled, yet

> there`s still a complete lack of stability???



I think there is a basic stability, but it is the stability of balance of

power and rough equivilence of power. This means there is plenty of

conflict, but none of it is ever decisive. That is certainly a kind of

stability.



Kenneth Gauck

kgauck@mchsi.com

[Osprey]

I think the more conflict is ongoing, the more likely that somewhere along the line, someone&#39;s going to get lucky ad power will shift. Active conflict simply has too many random elements (especially when converted to D20 mechanics&#33; :blink: ), and sooner or later somebody gets lucky. By Anuire&#39;s history of the past 550 years, there&#39;s been remarkably little change in boundaries and territories: Roesone, Ilien, and Medoere broke off from Diemed, Ghoere emerged to swallow up 2 of the original duchies (I forget their names at the moment...), and various other realms have sprung up or been carved out.

Yet as I&#39;ve read through the original campaign material, I keep coming up with an impression that borders shift or regents rise and fall only rarely. Suris Enlien of Medoere, Guilder Kalien of Endier, and Jaison Raenech of Osoerde stand as the only new (1st generation) landed regents in Anuire (that I can think of)...and that&#39;s within the past 30-50 years.

One standing impression I got was that there&#39;s a lot of petty skirmishing going on, but few serious bids for conquest or absolute dominance over one&#39;s enemies.

The problemn with that is that in my own experience in gameplay, that tends to be a big waste of precious domain actions and resources. Why waste troops in crappy border raids when you have the resources to raise a large elite army and REALLY do some damage, and maybe even conquer a realm or two?

In my campaign, it works out that the PC regents are the ones that have the drive and ambition to do just that. The effect is like a wave rippling outward as other regents jump to attention and decide it&#39;s time to get serious about their ambitions and stop mucking around on a petty scale. And thus, big things start happening everywhere...

But then again, I don&#39;t keep Anuire at a low level of play...

[Ariadne]

Originally posted by Elton Robb@Feb 4 2004, 11:32 PM

New Feat
Blooded Scion [General]
You have the blood of the old gods running through your veins.
Prerequisite: None
Benefit: Character is considered a scion and can have a blood score and subsequent blood abilities.

Irdeggman, having a prequisite of "none" is a bit to giving, do you think? The prerequisite should be: taken at character creation or bloodtheft. What do you think?
Can only be taken at first level (or by bloodtheft) seems reasonable...

BTW bloodtheft: IMO there it should be a free feat. Further DMs who like to master a blooded PC group should be free to grant it as a free feat generally...

[Elton Robb]

Originally posted by irdeggman@Feb 4 2004, 05:35 PM
There are plenty of feats with no prerequisites. If a character uses one of his very precious feats (only 1 every 3rd level after all) in order to take this feat it seems to me that he is giving up something of real value that he can&#39;t use to further his character (class wise). This is not a fighter, wizard or other class-bonus feat so a character would have to use one of his character level feats to obtain it.

Prerequisite of bloodtheft is really restrictive and wouldn&#39;t account for investiture like Aglondier received.

This is surprisingly (alright not too surprising since many people have talked about requiring a character to spend a feat to be blooded for a very long time on the boards) similar to the Dragon Article (which I hated by the way) which has a real similar feat (with no prerequisite either).

This is also a variant and not a default mode for the BRCS.
Oh, I see how this works. But if I were to run BRCS in 3E or 3.X, I&#39;d probably allow everyone an extra feat at character creation (humans get 3, everyone else gets 2).

[Trithemius]

Kenneth Gauck:

> I think there is a basic stability, but it is the stability of balance

> of power and rough equivilence of power. This means there is plenty of

> conflict, but none of it is ever decisive. That is certainly a kind of

> stability.



I think it is important to note that this kind of "armed camp" balance of power

is not the same as pre-WWI European "Great Powers" scenario. I have noticed too

many BR PBeMs collapse into two-faction total wars.



Low intensity warfare is the order of the day in Anuire I think; snatching weak

provinces here and there, or using force to coerce allegiance. Not outright

conquest of entire realms and the mass execution and bloodtheft of entire noble

families.



--

John Machin

(trithemius@paradise.net.nz)

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

"Nothing is more beautiful than to know the All."

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

- Athanasius Kircher, `The Great Art of Knowledge`.

[Trithemius]

Osprey:

> In my campaign, it works out that the PC regents are the ones that have

> the drive and ambition to do just that. The effect is like a wave

> rippling outward as other regents jump to attention and decide it`s time

> to get serious about their ambitions and stop mucking around on a petty

> scale. And thus, big things start happening everywhere...

>

> But then again, I don`t keep Anuire at a low level of play...



There is no problem with having the PCs as the agents of change. I do it a lot

in my games.



I just think that the "game history" should, as you say, reflect limited

intensity conflicts instead of vast land wars.



--

John Machin

(trithemius@paradise.net.nz)

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

"Nothing is more beautiful than to know the All."

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

- Athanasius Kircher, `The Great Art of Knowledge`.

[irdeggman]

Time to draw this thread back in.

The discussion is started to veer off of the topic, which was to troll (gotta love that word some many different ways to incorporate it into everyday life) for feedback on the Chapt 2 revision. It has started to go towards the meaning of power and politics which will soon lead to the meaning of life if history is to be repeated. ;)

[irdeggman]

Alright, like I said in another post here is the &#39;final&#39; version of Chapt 2. It is pretty much done with discussions. The only thing to be changed is typos and the like. I will probably call for a vote for &#39;final&#39; sanctioning in the next week. This is a zipped word document for download.

[irdeggman]

Here is a pdf version of the file. These versions are text only. Arjan will be inserting the artwork and such later once the entire document is done.

[Osprey]

Irdeggman,
I&#39;ve been reading over the latest version of revised Ch. 2, and I must say that overall you did a great job. Thank you, and congrats on good work accomplished&#33; :)

A few more detailed comments:

-I like the revision of the Great Heritage template. As it has no level adjustment, it is far less intrusive mechanically (as it doesn&#39;t have to be calculated into scion class levels- whew&#33;), and balanced instead by roleplaying and circumstance. I think this takes the revised BRCS toward a more mature level of play, and applaud the change.

-Are the scion class levels by derivation meant to be balanced, or is it assumed there is some inherent imbalance between various derivations because of the lines&#39; histories?

-I definitely like the Leadership bonuses for scion levels. I had been running a game game between 3.0 and 3.5, and had given Leadership as a bonus feat to Great scions, but I think this system works quite well. Again, good job&#33;

-OK, I do have a single piece of criticism: on the random tables, why has Long Life remained so common? If it were really as common as the percentages suggest, wouldn&#39;t this play a significant role in Cerilia&#39;s history and the status of regents? Why aren&#39;t there more high level regents and scions if so many of them (off the top of my head, I&#39;d say around 1 out of 4 scions would have Long Life, living 5-100 times their normal adult lifespans&#33;). Even the minor ability (1:5 adult aging) is a drastic increase in longevity, promoting quite a different picture of Cerilia than the one originally created (as Long Life wasn&#39;t an original BR ability at all&#33;). If we want the BRCS mechanics to match the forthcoming Atlas, I think some changes are necessary.


To me, there are 2 possible solutions to rectifying this issue:

1. The easiest one is to reduce its commonality on the random ability tables - like down to 2% frequency or so for all levels.

2. The other option is to reduce the actual effects of the ability - a move I made in my game though I expect it will never be done in an official revision &#39;cause of the way it was originally published. I think the ability wasn&#39;t well thought out when they came up with the numbers, other than to make the Great version account for the ancient awneshegh. A better version would allow a True bloodline power of Long Life that effectively stops natural aging altogether, granting a kind of limited immortality. Either that, or the Invulnerability power includes this effect (although in my game I raise Invulnerability to a True bloodline power as well, available only to a few True scions. .

The reason I think the power is unbalanced is if you compare to any other ways to get extended lifespans in 3.x D&D (that I know of), you&#39;ll find they are almost impossible to achieve short of really powerful magics (like Wish or Miracle) or an Epic Feat...and the feat is only a relatively small extension of lifespand compared to even the minor blood ability.

But all in all, terrific job&#33; Keep up the good work&#33;

Osprey

[Benjamin]

This is probably weeks too late, but...

Why is it we have gone over to the Highlander bloodtheft method? I&#39;m sure there was a thread about it somewhere, but I&#39;ve missed it. Not that I don&#39;t like it too much - it seems to be fine currently, with a little tweaking of the mechanic. Just curious.

Also, why is it we talk about a bloodline score that&#39;s 2x the blood ability score? I figure we should just use the basic d20 system of ability scores. The RP and everything can still be based on this, so why track a separate blood ability and bloodline score?

For instance, take the following table (I hope the spacing works):

Blood Ability..............Number of Blood Abilities............Max RP......Max RP
Score......Modifier......Minor.......Major.......G reat..........Per Turn.....Stored
1..............-5..............0.............0...............0.... ............2...............4
2..............-4..............0.............0...............0.... ............4...............8
3..............-4..............0.............0...............0.... ............6.............12
4..............-3..............0.............0...............0.... ............8.............16
5..............-3..............0.............0...............0.... ..........10.............20
6..............-2..............0.............0...............0.... ..........12.............24
7..............-2..............0.............0...............0.... ..........14.............28
8..............-1..............0.............0...............0.... ..........16.............32
9..............-1..............0.............0...............0.... ..........18.............36
10.............0..............1..............0.... ...........0..............20.............40
11.............0..............1..............0.... ...........0..............22.............44
12...........+1..............1..............1..... ..........0..............24.............48
13...........+1..............1..............1..... ..........0..............26.............52
14...........+2..............1..............1..... ..........0..............28.............56
15...........+2..............1..............1..... ..........0..............30.............60
16...........+3..............1..............1..... ..........1.............32.............64
17...........+3..............1..............1..... .........1..............34.............68
18...........+4..............2..............1..... .........1..............36.............72
19...........+4..............2..............1..... .........1..............38.............76
20............+5.............2..............2..... .........1..............40.............80
21............+5.............2..............2..... .........1..............42.............84
22............+6.............2..............2..... .........1..............44.............88
23............+6.............2..............2..... .........1..............46.............92
24............+7.............2..............2..... .........2..............48.............96
25............+7.............2..............2..... .........2..............50...........100
26............+8.............3..............2..... .........2..............52...........104
27............+8.............3..............2..... .........2..............54...........108
28............+9.............3..............3..... .........2..............56...........112
29............+9.............3..............3..... .........2..............58...........116
30..........+10.............3..............3...... ........2..............60...........120

(modified Table 2.3). Everything is still based on the stat, and we only have to think of it, not 3 other numbers, really.

[edit: fixed spacing]

[Osprey]

Also, why is it we talk about a bloodline score that&#39;s 2x the blood ability score? I figure we should just use the basic d20 system of ability scores. The RP and everything can still be based on this, so why track a separate blood ability and bloodline score?


Ummm...have you even read the BRCS playtest document? You really should, as your table is nearly identical to what was already published, then discussed on the forums over the past year, and finally revised in its current form. I don&#39;t have a direct link to the thread, but the thread revolving around a poll over 4 different proposals for a revised bloodline system (including the choice to keep it as it was in the BRCS) was the main area where this was debated. The system was changed from the bloodline as ability score because it seemed there was a clear majority of BR fans who wanted it back closer to the original 2e system. So the revision represents an attempt (and a good one, I think) to make a blood sytem that is compatible with 3.x D&D and more closely resembles the original 2e system of blood scores with 3e adaptations (like scion class levels).

-Osprey

[irdeggman]

Originally posted by Benjamin@Feb 25 2004, 03:29 PM
This is probably weeks too late, but...

Why is it we have gone over to the Highlander bloodtheft method? I&#39;m sure there was a thread about it somewhere, but I&#39;ve missed it. Not that I don&#39;t like it too much - it seems to be fine currently, with a little tweaking of the mechanic. Just curious.

Also, why is it we talk about a bloodline score that&#39;s 2x the blood ability score? I figure we should just use the basic d20 system of ability scores. The RP and everything can still be based on this, so why track a separate blood ability and bloodline score?

For instance, take the following table (I hope the spacing works):
(modified Table 2.3). Everything is still based on the stat, and we only have to think of it, not 3 other numbers, really.

[edit: fixed spacing]
The Highlander mechanic was introduced when the BRCS-playtest came out in Feb 03. Basically it added color along with a mechanic to something that was lacking color and had a weak mechanic in 2nd ed. I don&#39;t recall anyone having any specific complaints about the process.

The reason that the blood score went the way it did was because it was proposed as a straight 7th ability score in the BRCS-playtest, but there were many people who had problems with it that way. The biggest issue seemed to be that it caused a lot of back fill with NPCs from 2nd ed. This was an attempt to appease as many opinions as possible in order to develop a more standard baseline document that people could use when performing their own tweaks, as they will undoubtedly do.

The reason that it went through a 7th ability was that one of the polls I ran last year indicated that people wanted a random and a non-random method of determining the blood score. The only mechanic that seemed to work that way was to use the existing ability score generation methods - that is which ever method you use to generate ability scores should be used for this one also. Then double it so that it falls back more evenly in line with the 2nd ed NPCs. It can&#39;t be added to like other ability scores every 4th level since it is no longer treated as one except at the chracter creation step.

Check the list of threads earlier on this one that point towards the discussions over the past year concerning this Chapter for more information.

[ConjurerDragon]

Osprey 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=2132

>

> Osprey wrote:

> Irdeggman,

> I`ve been reading over the latest version of revised Ch. 2, and I must say that overall you did a great job. Thank you, and congrats on good work accomplished&#33; :)

>

> A few more detailed comments:

>

> -I like the revision of the Great Heritage template. As it has no level adjustment, it is far less intrusive mechanically (as it doesn`t have to be calculated into scion class levels- whew&#33;), and balanced instead by roleplaying and circumstance. I think this takes the revised BRCS toward a more mature level of play, and applaud the change.

>

> -Are the scion class levels by derivation meant to be balanced, or is it assumed there is some inherent imbalance between various derivations because of the lines` histories?

>

> -I definitely like the Leadership bonuses for scion levels. I had been running a game game between 3.0 and 3.5, and had given Leadership as a bonus feat to Great scions, but I think this system works quite well. Again, good job&#33;

>

> -OK, I do have a single piece of criticism: on the random tables, why has Long Life remained so common? If it were really as common as the percentages suggest, wouldn`t this play a significant role in Cerilia`s history and the status of regents? Why aren`t there more high level regents and scions if so many of them (off the top of my head, I`d say around 1 out of 4 scions would have Long Life, living 5-100 times their normal adult lifespans&#33;). Even the minor ability (1:5 adult aging) is a drastic increase in longevity, promoting quite a different picture of Cerilia than the one originally created (as Long Life wasn`t an original BR ability at all&#33;). If we want the BRCS mechanics to match the forthcoming Atlas, I think some changes are necessary.

>

>

> To me, there are 2 possible solutions to rectifying this issue:

>

> 1. The easiest one is to reduce its commonality on the random ability tables - like down to 2% frequency or so for all levels.

>

> 2. The other option is to reduce the actual effects of the ability - a move I made in my game though I expect it will never be done in an official revision `cause of the way it was originally published. I think the ability wasn`t well thought out when they came up with the numbers, other than to make the Great version account for the ancient awneshegh. A better version would allow a True bloodline power of Long Life that effectively stops natural aging altogether, granting a kind of limited immortality. Either that, or the Invulnerability power includes this effect (although in my game I raise Invulnerability to a True bloodline power as well, available only to a few True scions. .

>

>

Simply handwaive that scions with the Long Life bloodability are the

MAJOR target of bloodchallenges, assuming that the challengers believe

to become immortal themselfs when they kill the scion with long life.

That would drastically reduce the number without any rule changes.

bye

Michael

[Osprey]

Simply handwaive that scions with the Long Life bloodability are the
MAJOR target of bloodchallenges, assuming that the challengers believe
to become immortal themselfs when they kill the scion with long life.
That would drastically reduce the number without any rule changes.
bye
Michael

That would make for a rather high rate of death by violence - extremely high even for Cerilia, at least among scions. I think this, too, would mean writing in a major new element of Cerilian culture that wasn&#39;t so dramatically present in the original material. I never got the impresion reading the material that most Cerilian regents/scions died through Blood Challenges and the like.

I still feel this issue needs some reworking, be it in the history or the power itself - in this case I&#39;d rather tinker with the power than rewrite Cerilian history.

[geeman]

Michael writes:



QUOTE]Simply handwaive that scions with the Long Life bloodability are the

MAJOR target of bloodchallenges, assuming that the challengers believe

to become immortal themselfs when they kill the scion with long life.

That would drastically reduce the number without any rule changes.

[/QUOTE]



I don`t think I`d do that myself. It just seems like a gyp to turn Long

Life into a death sentance....



Gary

[Green Knight]

For those playing dynastic games, where lifespan actually means

something, long life is possibly the most broken blood ability there is.

Any ruler who can sit on the throne for a hundred years or more will

seriously upset the balance of things (and I`m talking human realms

here). Indeed, it might be argued that the lifespans shown in the Core

Rulebooks are quite long for the type of setting in the first place.



Well, here is a suggestion for those that don`t like Long Life as it is,

but still like the concept:



Long Life (minor): The scion is guaranteed a long and healthy life. +4

bonus on Fort saves against disease. Suffers penalties from aging one

category late (but get bonuses normally).

Long Life (major): The scion is guaranteed an exceptionallt long and

healthy life. +8 bonus on Fort saves against disease. Suffers penalties

from aging two categories late (but get bonuses normally). Roll double

the normal dice for maximum age.

Long Life (great): The scion is guaranteed an exceptionallt long and

healthy life. Immune to disease. Suffers no penalties from aging (but

get bonuses normally). Roll quadruple the normal dice for maximum age.

[Green Knight]

Oh, and this would mean that extremely long-lived NPCs (like the major

awnsheghlien) have extraordinarily long lifespans as a function of their

bloodform (perhaps in conjunction with long life)



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

From: Birthright Roleplaying Game Discussion

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

Sørgjerd

Sent: 26. februar 2004 08:43

To: BIRTHRIGHT-L@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM

Subject: Long Life (was: Chap 2 Revision [36#2132])



For those playing dynastic games, where lifespan actually means

something, long life is possibly the most broken blood ability there is.

Any ruler who can sit on the throne for a hundred years or more will

seriously upset the balance of things (and I`m talking human realms

here). Indeed, it might be argued that the lifespans shown in the Core

Rulebooks are quite long for the type of setting in the first place.



Well, here is a suggestion for those that don`t like Long Life as it is,

but still like the concept:



Long Life (minor): The scion is guaranteed a long and healthy life. +4

bonus on Fort saves against disease. Suffers penalties from aging one

category late (but get bonuses normally).

Long Life (major): The scion is guaranteed an exceptionallt long and

healthy life. +8 bonus on Fort saves against disease. Suffers penalties

from aging two categories late (but get bonuses normally). Roll double

the normal dice for maximum age.

Long Life (great): The scion is guaranteed an exceptionallt long and

healthy life. Immune to disease. Suffers no penalties from aging (but

get bonuses normally). Roll quadruple the normal dice for maximum age.



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

****



Birthright-l Archives:

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

[irdeggman]

I like the changes in age categories, but don&#39;t see a reason for the bonuses to diseases. The ability as written and this new proposal both fit into 3.5 mechanics equally well so there is no 3.5 compatiability issue favoring either one. The 2nd ed ability didn&#39;t grant the elven immunity to diseases, only a longer &#39;natural&#39; lifespan.


Gosh - I wish that these comments (on the % breakdowns and the &#39;issues&#39; with the specific blood ability) had come out some time ago. Especially since neither was changed in the Chap 2 revision (which went out in Nov &#39;03 for comment) and were out there since Feb 03 for comment.

That &#39;minor&#39; complaint being given, I have always been open to someone coming up with a &#39;better&#39; random % table. As Gary can tell you it is a real pain trying to put one together that makes some kind of &#39;sense&#39;. I had &#39;forced&#39; him, Shade and Mark V to come up with some when we put together the proposals for voting. I&#39;m tired of trying to match up the numbers, heck I&#39;ve still got to prepare my taxes so don&#39;t get me started.

If someone generates &#39;better&#39; random tables, please e-mail them to me and I&#39;ll see if I can get them in or if I get more than one then I&#39;ll see which ones looks better to me. I don&#39;t think that should affect the &#39;sanctioning&#39; of the revised chapter though.

[Benjamin]

Thanks for the clarification on the Highlander type bloodtheft. I don&#39;t have a problem with it - I do like the spice it adds. I was just curious where it came from.

As for the blood ability score, I like that, too. I like having the 7th ability, especially when using a point buy system. It means that a scion&#39;s stats will be lower on average than a nonblooded character. Cheers to that.

Osprey - yes, I did read the BRCS doc. My chart, is basically straight out of the revised Chapter 2. The reason I posted it because I keep getting confused when we start talking about blood ability score, bloodline score, double bloodline score for RP gained, and quadruple bloodline score for RP kept. I say we just use the blood ability score, and base everything clearly off that. That&#39;s what my table is for instead of the current Table 2-3 which only has even numbers. Any changes in bloodline score would actually be increases in the blood ability stat.

Another thing I noticed - the table had bonuses that aren&#39;t in line with the numbers listed from the PHB for stats. My understanding is that, to find the bonus (or penalty) associated with the stat, divide by 2 (rounded down) and subtract 5. Maybe I&#39;m wrong, though. :)

All in all, it&#39;s a very good revision. I like it a lot. Only thing I would really suggest is a bit of editing to put similar topics together more.

[geeman]

At 11:55 AM 2/26/2004 +0100, irdeggman wrote:



>I like the changes in age categories, but don`t see a reason for the

>bonuses to diseases. The ability as written and this new proposal both

>fit into 3.5 mechanics equally well so there is no 3.5 compatiability

>issue favoring either one. The 2nd ed ability didn`t grant the elven

>immunity to diseases, only a longer `natural` lifespan.



It kind of makes sense, though. Living a long life would seem to have a

similar divine connection to living a long _and healthy_ life. I think it

could work as part of a more articulated (Bloodline Point...) system of

portraying blood abilities.



>Gosh - I wish that these comments (on the % breakdowns and the `issues`

>with the specific blood ability) had come out some time ago. Especially

>since neither was changed in the Chap 2 revision (which went out in Nov

>`03 for comment) and were out there since Feb 03 for comment.



Would that it were possible to get all the ideas up front....



>I have always been open to someone coming up with a `better` random %

>table. As Gary can tell you it is a real pain trying to put one together

>that makes some kind of `sense`. I had `forced` him, Shade and Mark V to

>come up with some when we put together the proposals for voting. I`m

>tired of trying to match up the numbers, heck I`ve still got to prepare my

>taxes so don`t get me started.



I`ll back up irdeggman on that one.... Random blood ability tables for BR

have a complexity that is just obnoxious to try to portray as a set of

tables. There are too many blood abilities to just assign a single value

and put a die type at the top of the column, and too few not to portray

with individual percentages for the d100, so it winds up being this

individual assessment thing that takes nearly as much time and

consideration as actually writing up the blood ability

descriptions. Should that be 3% or 4%? What does that do to the rest of

the percentages? Now I have to change the numbers in the whole

column.... Ah, man....



It is also probably the best answer to the question regarding why it takes

a long time for this stuff to get revised. It`s certainly true that things

that come out of the BR community are entirely voluntary, that they must be

produced in the spare time (increasingly a scarce commodity in modern life)

of the people putting them together, but most significantly once one gets a

draft done the work load does NOT decrease for revisions as seems to have

been the assumption by those complaining about the time being taken. At

least, not for any meaningful revisions. One little change often has broad

repercussions. E.B. White said, "The best writing is rewriting" and Louis

Brandels said, "There is no such thing as good writing, only good

rewriting." I`d add to both those statements the note that "and it`s

really where most of the of work of writing occurs."



Gary

[Ariadne]

Originally posted by The Green Knight
For those playing dynastic games, where lifespan actually means something, long life is possibly the most broken blood ability there is. Any ruler who can sit on the throne for a hundred years or more will seriously upset the balance of things (and I`m talking human realms here). Indeed, it might be argued that the lifespans shown in the Core Rulebooks are quite long for the type of setting in the first place.

Well, here is a suggestion for those that don`t like Long Life as it is, but still like the concept:

Long Life (minor): The scion is guaranteed a long and healthy life. +4 bonus on Fort saves against disease. Suffers penalties from aging one category late (but get bonuses normally).

Long Life (major): The scion is guaranteed an exceptionallt long and healthy life. +8 bonus on Fort saves against disease. Suffers penalties from aging two categories late (but get bonuses normally). Roll double the normal dice for maximum age.

Long Life (great): The scion is guaranteed an exceptionallt long and healthy life. Immune to disease. Suffers no penalties from aging (but get bonuses normally). Roll quadruple the normal dice for maximum age.
Well, using this system would mean, let the Gorgon hardly get out of his chair. After that he has to support himself against his greatsword to get to the bath where his false teeth can be found… :D

Fun to the side&#33; The idea of aging in age categories isn’t bad, but there aren’t many guys, who play dynastic games (as far as I can say). For all others Long Life has nearly no game effect, if they gain it after character creation (otherwise they can make themselves a bit older to gain the advantages of aging). Turning down an already “week” blood ability (usable ONLY, if playing in centuries) wouldn’t be this good. Further it would have several game effects, nobody can see now. This would mean, nearly every Awnshegh, who is as old as Deismaar would be dead (or nearly dead) now, because he simply died of old age. The quadruple of a human’s age is about 400 years, what means the Gorgon wouldn’t be very healty anymore (even if you take the age categories of a gorgon, that aren’t 2000 years). To be exactely: I think, that with this system only the Manslayer would still be alive, because he is simply an elf (I don’t count the “young” awnsheghs)...

[ConjurerDragon]

Ariadne 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=2132

>

> Ariadne wrote:

> [quote]Originally posted by The Green Knight
[b] For those playing dynastic games, where lifespan actually means something, long life is possibly the most broken blood ability there is. Any ruler who can sit on the throne for a hundred years or more will seriously upset the balance of things (and I`m talking human realms here). Indeed, it might be argued that the lifespans shown in the Core Rulebooks are quite long for the type of setting in the first place.

>

>

...



> Well, using this system would mean, let the Gorgon hardly get out of his chair. After that he has to support himself against his greatsword to get to the bath where his false teeth can be found… :D

>

>

Except that Green Knight wrote about this that:



> Oh, and this would mean that extremely long-lived NPCs (like the major

> awnsheghlien) have extraordinarily long lifespans as a function of their

> bloodform (perhaps in conjunction with long life)



So for the Gorgon not the same rule as for the normal scion with Long

Life (major)

bye

Michael

[Green Knight]

CLEVER reply.



With some imagination (or the next mail I sent) you might have been able

to divine that perhaps the exceptional long life of major awnsheghlien

has to do with something else



:-D



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

From: Birthright Roleplaying Game Discussion

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

Sent: 26. februar 2004 20:14

To: BIRTHRIGHT-L@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM

Subject: Re: Chap 2 Revision [36#2132]



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

You can view the entire thread at:

http://www.birthright.net/forums/index.php...36&t=2132<br (http://www.birthright.net/forums/index.php?act=ST&f=36&t=2132<br) />


Ariadne wrote:

&#60;&#33;--QuoteBegin-The Green Knight+--&#62;</div><table border=`0`

align=`center` width=`95%` cellpadding=`3`

cellspacing=`1`><tr><td>QUOTE (The Green Knight)</td></tr><tr><td

id=`QUOTE`>&#60;&#33;--QuoteEBegin--&#62; For those playing dynastic games, where

lifespan actually means something, long life is possibly the most broken

blood ability there is. Any ruler who can sit on the throne for a

hundred years or more will seriously upset the balance of things (and

I`m talking human realms here). Indeed, it might be argued that the

lifespans shown in the Core Rulebooks are quite long for the type of

setting in the first place.



Well, here is a suggestion for those that don`t like Long Life as it

is, but still like the concept:



Long Life (minor): The scion is guaranteed a long and healthy life. +4

bonus on Fort saves against disease. Suffers penalties from aging one

category late (but get bonuses normally).



Long Life (major): The scion is guaranteed an exceptionallt long and

healthy life. +8 bonus on Fort saves against disease. Suffers penalties

from aging two categories late (but get bonuses normally). Roll double

the normal dice for maximum age.



Long Life (great): The scion is guaranteed an exceptionallt long and

healthy life. Immune to disease. Suffers no penalties from aging (but

get bonuses normally). Roll quadruple the normal dice for maximum

age.[/QUOTE]

Well, using this system would mean, let the Gorgon hardly get out of

his chair. After that he has to support himself against his greatsword

to get to the bath where his false teeth can be found… :D



Fun to the side&#33; The idea of aging in age categories isn’t bad, but

there aren’t many guys, who play dynastic games (as far as I can say).

For all others Long Life has nearly no game effect, if they gain it

after character creation (otherwise they can make themselves a bit older

to gain the advantages of aging). Turning down an already “week” blood

ability (usable ONLY, if playing in centuries) wouldn’t be this good.

Further it would have several game effects, nobody can see now. This

would mean, nearly every Awnshegh, who is as old as Deismaar would be

dead (or nearly dead) now, because he simply died of old age. The

quadruple of a human’s age is about 400 years, what means the Gorgon

wouldn’t be very healty anymore (even if you take the age categories of

a gorgon, that aren’t 2000 years). To be exactely: I think, that with

this system only the Manslayer would still be alive, because he is

simply an elf (I don’t count the “young” awnsheghs)...

[Green Knight]

Which was why I tried to re-name the thread (this is a Char 2 Revision

thread), since it had nothing to do with revising Chap 2...



Stupid board/BR-L interaction...



Arjaaaan!



:-D



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

From: Birthright Roleplaying Game Discussion

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

Sent: 26. februar 2004 20:14

To: BIRTHRIGHT-L@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM

Subject: Re: Chap 2 Revision [36#2132]



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=2132



Ariadne wrote:


Originally posted by The Green Knight
[b] For those playing dynastic games, where

lifespan actually means something, long life is possibly the most broken

blood ability there is. Any ruler who can sit on the throne for a

hundred years or more will seriously upset the balance of things (and

I`m talking human realms here). Indeed, it might be argued that the

lifespans shown in the Core Rulebooks are quite long for the type of

setting in the first place.



Well, here is a suggestion for those that don`t like Long Life as it

is, but still like the concept:



Long Life (minor): The scion is guaranteed a long and healthy life. +4

bonus on Fort saves against disease. Suffers penalties from aging one

category late (but get bonuses normally).



Long Life (major): The scion is guaranteed an exceptionallt long and

healthy life. +8 bonus on Fort saves against disease. Suffers penalties

from aging two categories late (but get bonuses normally). Roll double

the normal dice for maximum age.



Long Life (great): The scion is guaranteed an exceptionallt long and

healthy life. Immune to disease. Suffers no penalties from aging (but

get bonuses normally). Roll quadruple the normal dice for maximum

age.

Well, using this system would mean, let the Gorgon hardly get out of

his chair. After that he has to support himself against his greatsword

to get to the bath where his false teeth can be found… :D



Fun to the side&#33; The idea of aging in age categories isn’t bad, but

there aren’t many guys, who play dynastic games (as far as I can say).

For all others Long Life has nearly no game effect, if they gain it

after character creation (otherwise they can make themselves a bit older

to gain the advantages of aging). Turning down an already “week” blood

ability (usable ONLY, if playing in centuries) wouldn’t be this good.

Further it would have several game effects, nobody can see now. This

would mean, nearly every Awnshegh, who is as old as Deismaar would be

dead (or nearly dead) now, because he simply died of old age. The

quadruple of a human’s age is about 400 years, what means the Gorgon

wouldn’t be very healty anymore (even if you take the age categories of

a gorgon, that aren’t 2000 years). To be exactely: I think, that with

this system only the Manslayer would still be alive, because he is

simply an elf (I don’t count the “young” awnsheghs)...











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

****



Birthright-l Archives:

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

[tcharazazel]

Well, what about those PC rulers with the long life ability who choose to step down and go adventuring, pasing the crown or what ever to their choosen heir. The PC could then easily start playin this heir and have the ex-ruler become an NPC who may show up from time to time to check on the state of the realm. Just a different possibilty for those who get Long life.

In other words putting a time limit on the PC, because normally how many PCs play until their character dies of old age? Heh, would make more sense then to just impose a house rule preventing PCs from playin characters for over 50-100 years game time.

[Osprey]

To ideggman and the rest of the BR community:

How does this sound for frequency of Long Life as a random blood ability (to make it suitably rare)?

Minor: 4%
Major: 3%
Great: 2%

If these are agreeable to most, then I might give a shot at rewriting the tables (with an attempt at keeping everything else roughly proportionate to the current tables).

If these figures are accurate, then perhaps we can say somthing to this effect:

"Occasionally scions are known to live longer than usual as their divine bloodlines sustain well beyond the human norm. A few have been reported to live centuries or even millenia, though most of these scions are either awnsegh, ersegh, or have otherwise retired from public life. Naturally such long-lived scions, especially regents or ex-regents, make tempting targets for bloodtheft, and thus tend to be more and more reclusive or paranoid as they grow older. Assuming they manage to survive that long..."

I think we can combine several ideas into one cohesive whole here. Even if we leave Long Life alone in terms of its mechanics (which I expect is what will happen), the fact that a regent who has ruled for a hundred years has a giant bullseye painted on his/her heart would tend to dissuade most long-lived scions from remaining in the public view, especially as a regent. And if you live anywhere near the Gorgon, you&#39;re an even bigger target. :(

As for the apparently immortal Gorgon...

What if Greater Regeneration + Long Life = virtual immortality (immune to aging effects)? And as I&#39;ve said before, the Invulnerability power could also work that way (for the Spider, for instance).

-Osprey

[kgauck]

I encourage the reverse. I want the older, high level characters to retire

to running realms, while the younger characters actually adventure.



Kenneth Gauck

kgauck@mchsi.com

[tcharazazel]

Aye, normally I would agree with you, and if they had normal life spans it would make sense, tho they would be living for centuries and they would easily be epic level characters. So they would just demolish any competition as the other NPC regents and most characters in BR are low-med level characters. Hence, If you know you will live for another few hundred years you might as well fullfill your duty by having kids and then picking the best one to rule, and go on a vacation, heheh, an extended vacation considering you&#39;d still be around for a long time.

[RaspK_FOG]

I would like to make another suggestion: why not use the Slow Aging class feature from The Wheel of Time, with a little tweaking and a lot of fun, to our liking?

Long Life
Minor: You age 1/2× as fast as normal creatures (2 years equal 1 year).
Major: You age 1/4× as fast as normal creatures (4 years equal 1 year).
Great: You age 1/6× as fast as normal creatures (6 years equal 1 year).

[tcharazazel]

yeah thats basically what Osprey, my GM, has done with the abilities is that minor makes it 1/2 major is 1/5 and great is 1/25. If you have bloodform or bloodtrait it would follow the old versions ones posted in BRCS, minor 1/5, major 1/25 and great 1/100. Thus explaining why the Gorgon is still around and why all those blooded human rulers died earlier even if some of them got the long life ability.

[irdeggman]

Originally posted by Osprey@Feb 26 2004, 06:13 PM
To ideggman and the rest of the BR community:

How does this sound for frequency of Long Life as a random blood ability (to make it suitably rare)?

Minor: 4%
Major: 3%
Great: 2%

If these are agreeable to most, then I might give a shot at rewriting the tables (with an attempt at keeping everything else roughly proportionate to the current tables).

-Osprey
Take a shot my man. And good luck, I think you&#39;ve just opened a major can of worms for yourself.

I don&#39;t think we need anymore color text added on this one. I really don&#39;t like specific color concering a single blood ability.

My e-mail is irdeggman@cox.net.

The biggest thing with long life is that the scion won&#39;t know he has it until he has lost or is close to losing friends due to their aging and dying.

I think the major reason that there aren&#39;t a lot of long-lived regents that are know about is the fact that they committ suicide. If you look at some of the discussion on elves and their long lives. It says that sometimes they just decide not to exist anymore that they get tired of living and fade away. Or something to that effect. I think that was in one of the PS, although I can&#39;t recall which one specifically.

Humans and other short lived demi-humans aren&#39;t accustomed to being immortal. In many ways this could explain some of the Spider&#39;s insanity.

[ConjurerDragon]

RaspK_FOG 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=2132

>

> RaspK_FOG wrote:

> I would like to make another suggestion: why not use the Slow Aging class feature from The Wheel of Time, with a little tweaking and a lot of fun, to our liking?

>

>

> Minor: You age 1/2× as fast as normal creatures (2 years equal 1 year).

> Major: You age 1/4× as fast as normal creatures (4 years equal 1 year).

> Great: You age 1/6× as fast as normal creatures (6 years equal 1 year).

>

The ability has been described as already too weak (solely except in

games that run a long time and the regent saves himself the work of

growing heirs and managing seamless changes from him to his heirs) for

players to consider to take it.

There have e.g. been suggestions to exempt scions with that ability from

the aging penaltys (but still give them the bonus for aging) so that

more players are encouraged to take it.



Weakening the ability further by reducing the lenght of the long life

will make it even less attractive to players.

bye

Michael

[Osprey]

The ability has been described as already too weak (solely except in
games that run a long time and the regent saves himself the work of
growing heirs and managing seamless changes from him to his heirs) for
players to consider to take it.
There have e.g. been suggestions to exempt scions with that ability from
the aging penaltys (but still give them the bonus for aging) so that
more players are encouraged to take it.

Weakening the ability further by reducing the lenght of the long life
will make it even less attractive to players.
bye
Michael


The longer a campaign runs, though, the more attractive any form of long life becomes. I reduced its length as tcharazazel mentioned in my own campaign, and guess what? Just about every regent PC either has taken it or is planning on taking it when their bloodline strengthens.

So as the years go by (the kind of thing that only happens ina domain-level game), aging willbecome more and more of an issue as characters approach that aging penalty and start thinking what they could do with 5 times as long to live their remaining lives...

That&#39;s been my own experience...

[Green Knight]

Even if the matter of Long Life isn`t an issue in most (?) campaigns,

since they apparently don`t last enough, it`s also a matter of providing

a consistent world.



If even a couple of major scion had the long life ability in the past,

say a former prince of Avanil with Major Long Life, where did they all

go?

[geeman]

At 08:34 AM 2/28/2004 +0100, you wrote:



>If even a couple of major scion had the long life ability in the past, say

>a former prince of Avanil with Major Long Life, where did they all go?



There are a few Khinasi scions with Long Life who have gone into "hiding"

which might not be the best example but could provide a hint or two. It`s

such a mainstay of sci-fi/fantasy fiction that characters who somehow

prolong their lives must turn their back on society, those they knew, etc.

for reasons having to do with jealousy of those not so similarly "blessed"

to the simple need not to watch those one loves age and die.



Along those lines, there`s also the issue of whether or not many mortals

"have the stamina for immortality." Elves are immortal by nature, so it

can be presumed that they are inclined towards whatever psychology is

necessary to live a very long life, but humans (and other mortals) might

not be able to handle the process. They might suicide, go mad, or seek to

live in isolation.



Another option that`s perhaps much more further afield--they might

transcend into some higher form. Of the three Cerilian gods who have been

"born" after Deismaar, perhaps they were mortals who gained godly

powers. That they are described as the children of existing gods might be

more symbolic than actual--the gods don`t "have children" so much as they

adopt.



Gary

[ConjurerDragon]

Osprey 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=2132

>

> Osprey wrote:

>
The ability has been described as already too weak (solely except in

> games that run a long time and the regent saves himself the work of

> growing heirs and managing seamless changes from him to his heirs) for

> players to consider to take it.

> There have e.g. been suggestions to exempt scions with that ability from

> the aging penaltys (but still give them the bonus for aging) so that

> more players are encouraged to take it.

>

> Weakening the ability further by reducing the lenght of the long life

> will make it even less attractive to players.

> bye

> Michael

>

>

> The longer a campaign runs, though, the more attractive any form of long life becomes. I reduced its length as tcharazazel mentioned in my own campaign, and guess what? Just about every regent PC either has taken it or is planning on taking it when their bloodline strengthens.

>

> So as the years go by (the kind of thing that only happens ina domain-level game), aging willbecome more and more of an issue as characters approach that aging penalty and start thinking what they could do with 5 times as long to live their remaining lives...

>

> That`s been my own experience...

>

And that was the reason that I wrote "(solely except in games that run a

long time and the regent saves himself the work of



growing heirs and managing seamless changes from him to his heirs)" in my original message ;-)



Being a human with Long Life (major) is still inferior to being a sidhelien without any bloodability of Long Life - and by the way what would "Long Life (whatever)" grant a sidhelien with a bloodline who is just as likely to get it when rolling randomly as the human?

bye

Michael

[ConjurerDragon]

Bjørn Eian Sørgjerd schrieb:



>Even if the matter of Long Life isn`t an issue in most (?) campaigns,

>since they apparently don`t last enough, it`s also a matter of providing

>a consistent world.

>

>If even a couple of major scion had the long life ability in the past,

>say a former prince of Avanil with Major Long Life, where did they all

>go?

>

Die? Long Life just as the "immortality" of sidhelien does not protect

against violent death (another war with Boeruine, an Ogre raid from the

Mountains, being eaten by the Seadrake, being assasinated by Brosengae

as this regent of Avanil favoured his vassal Taeghas) ;-)



And knowing human nature perhaps even be *forced by the own heirs* to

abdicate as they did not longer want to wait for the throne, perhaps not

the own children but the grandchildren certainly not want to stay

"heirs" their whole life as their parents did...



The devious DM should be free to have them roll an insanity check (will

save?) against becoming lunatic every year after they exceeded their

normal human maximum life time) and the results of a failed save could

be the same as in the Rjurik domain of Halskapa described for King Bervinig?

bye

Michael

[RaspK_FOG]

I changed the Long Life factors due to the various intricacies involved in such a situation, but the suggestion Osprey made should work just fine...

On another note, I generally disagree with the whole "save or bite the dust" logic introduced by earlier versions of D&D (and yes, at long last, disintegrate deals 2d6 points of damage per level, didintegrating everyone and everything at 0 hit points&#33; O~O Urgh&#33;), so I suggest you use the insanity system from the Wheel of Time (I simply love it), or the taint score concept from Oriental Adventures. To those of you who do not know how the Wheel of Time&#39;s madness system works, and to those of you who like insanity checks, say that a character has to roll 1d6 whenever his madness should increase (game-based effects and role-playing situations alike, with a little care from the DM so as not to go over his head with the latter case) and add it to his madness score; the character initially exhibits phobias, ticks, then paranoia, and, in the end, pure insanity. Anyone interested could check the Wheel of Time or request an email for more details.

[geeman]

At 05:32 AM 2/28/2004 +0100, Osprey wrote:



>The longer a campaign runs, though, the more attractive any form of long

>life becomes.



It also opens up the possibility of time jumping through the setting to

create an epic saga type campaign. One could still that kind of thing in a

generational way, but to fully utilize BR`s Highlander similarities Long

Life or elven blood are the most obvious alternatives.



When it comes to the LL ability what I`m thinking might make some sense

right now is to assume that even a 1st level character with that ability is

significantly older than normal. That is, the blood ability has kicked in

when s/he hits adolescence (13-15 years old) but the character has not yet

fully matured--and gained his/er 1st character level for several years of

physical age--meaning decades or even centuries of actual time have

passed. That added time will give the character certain abilities (similar

to bardic lore or some such effects.) That way the character is still at

the "proper" age for a PC, their blood ability has actual game effects, and

the blood ability itself still functions as described in the gaming

materials. It creates some interesting possibilities with PCs too, like

the possibility that they are adventuring with their own progeny.



I use a more articulated system of blood abilities, so I`ll need to

associate it with that. I`m revising those rules at present, but haven`t

gotten much past the Blood Form/Trait blood ability, so when I get to Long

Life I`ll post it to get some opinions.



Gary

[RaspK_FOG]

Interested to see; please let us know, OK?

[BrennanHawkwood]

Hmmm...looking good. I&#39;m really exited to see some progress on parts of the BRCS. I just skimmed over the new file and eveything looks pretty cool. About the only item I scratched my head at was Enhanced sense. The Azrai version gives low-light vision and the version for Brenna gives darkvision and is described as "being blessed with the sight and hearing of a cat" Being a cat owner, I&#39;d be the first to say that their night vision is pretty impressive...but even a cat cannot see if there is no light all. IIRC, that is exactly what darkvision allows however. I would suggest switching the type of vision provided with these two derivations. Lowlight is much closer to the way a cat sees and I can easily see the bloodline of Azrai allowing one to see in the dark regardless of light levels. I know this is supposed to be the final version so I won&#39;t be miffed or anything if it isn&#39;t done officially (after all, I have no problem just changing it for my games <grin>). Sorry I never got a chance to speak up before...never got a chance to really read through the material before this last weekend.

-- Blair Monroe

[irdeggman]

Originally posted by BrennanHawkwood@Mar 2 2004, 02:36 PM
Hmmm...looking good. I&#39;m really exited to see some progress on parts of the BRCS. I just skimmed over the new file and eveything looks pretty cool. About the only item I scratched my head at was Enhanced sense. The Azrai version gives low-light vision and the version for Brenna gives darkvision and is described as "being blessed with the sight and hearing of a cat" Being a cat owner, I&#39;d be the first to say that their night vision is pretty impressive...but even a cat cannot see if there is no light all. IIRC, that is exactly what darkvision allows however. I would suggest switching the type of vision provided with these two derivations. Lowlight is much closer to the way a cat sees and I can easily see the bloodline of Azrai allowing one to see in the dark regardless of light levels. I know this is supposed to be the final version so I won&#39;t be miffed or anything if it isn&#39;t done officially (after all, I have no problem just changing it for my games <grin>). Sorry I never got a chance to speak up before...never got a chance to really read through the material before this last weekend.

-- Blair Monroe
True enough about the &#39;description&#39;, but we were trying to keep as consistent with the 2nd ed material as possible.

2nd ed Enhanced Senses had Azrai with the ability to see into and through shadows without difficulty. They could see at dusk as well as if it were bright daylight. {Sounds like a pretty good description of low light vision}

Brenna had the sight and hearing of cats. They had infravision to 30 ft. {Infravision became darkvision in 3.0)

I hope that helps with why it came out the way it did.

[BrennanHawkwood]

Originally posted by irdeggman@Mar 2 2004, 10:07 PM
True enough about the &#39;description&#39;, but we were trying to keep as consistent with the 2nd ed material as possible.

2nd ed Enhanced Senses had Azrai with the ability to see into and through shadows without difficulty. They could see at dusk as well as if it were bright daylight. {Sounds like a pretty good description of low light vision}

Brenna had the sight and hearing of cats. They had infravision to 30 ft. {Infravision became darkvision in 3.0)

I hope that helps with why it came out the way it did.
Ah. Yeah, looking at it from the angle of what got &#39;converted&#39; to what between 2nd and 3rd edition themselves, that would make sense.

Thanks for the explanation.

-- Blair

[JanGunterssen]

>>True enough about the &#39;description&#39;, but we were trying to keep as
>>consistent with the 2nd ed material as possible.

>>2nd ed Enhanced Senses had Azrai with the ability to see into and >>through shadows without difficulty. They could see at dusk as well as if it
>>were bright daylight. {Sounds like a pretty good description of low light
>>vision}

>>Brenna had the sight and hearing of cats. They had infravision to 30 ft.
>>{Infravision became darkvision in 3.0)

>>I hope that helps with why it came out the way it did.

You can see in the MM that animals like cat has low light vision, not darkvision. I think they have worked out completely the concept of infravision to darkvision. Now 3ed Darkvision is not just 2nd Infravision ability. You could remember that elves has Infravision in AD&D but in the 3ed D&D they posess low light vision.

I agree with Blair that if a scion of Brenna can see and hear like a cat, he should gain low light vision, while the dark god blood, the shadow god blood should give Darkvision.

I think you have done a great work trying to implement AD&D Birthright rules to the 3ed. Just that there has been fine tuning that should be done according to the new ed principles (not just the new rules).

[BrennanHawkwood]

Originally posted by geeman@Feb 28 2004, 11:30 AM
At 08:34 AM 2/28/2004 +0100, you wrote:

If even a couple of major scion had the long life ability in the past, say a former prince of Avanil with Major Long Life, where did they all go?

There are a few Khinasi scions with Long Life who have gone into "hiding" which might not be the best example but could provide a hint or two. It`s such a mainstay of sci-fi/fantasy fiction that characters who somehow prolong their lives must turn their back on society, those they knew, etc. for reasons having to do with jealousy of those not so similarly "blessed" to the simple need not to watch those one loves age and die.


This thread had me trying to think of which Anuirean regents had long life. It seemed to me that a couple of them did and I was just now able to hunt down what I was remembering.

According to the Book of Regency, the Baron of Ghoere, Gavin Tael, has Iron Will and Long Life (major). Other than being depicted as a very patient ruler the rest of the description doesn&#39;t seem to mention it at all.

The other one I remembered isn&#39;t a certainty. In the description of the Imperial Chamberlain it is mentioned that he was rumored to be immortal. IIRC there whether he is or isn&#39;t is left up to the DM and there wasn&#39;t any specific listing of long life as one of his blood abilities, but it could well be a case of another very long living scion who is fading in and out of the limelight. Reappearing as &#39;another member of the family&#39; when needed.

-- Blair Monroe

[RaspK_FOG]

Actually, one of the most interesting changes from 2e to 3.×e is the change from "infravision" to "darkvision vs. low-light vision". Scientifically speaking, infravision was a goof in and of itself, since thermal patterns tend to have a lot of turbulence, and would thus scramble themselves too effectively to base a whole reading on them; another foolish part of the mechanic (an inherent flaw of the most irrational conceptualisation behind 2e balancing methods) was the whole tuning idea...

In any case, infravision actually has been converted into two different things: the variable keenness of eyesight in limited light intensity, known as "low-light vision", and the standard-effect non-light-based visual acuity, known as "darkvision".

Low-light vision represents an organism&#39;s ability to either process low-intensity light so that visual attributes can be thereby noticed, or a keenness of sight that naturally works well even in low-lit conditions. Animals are good examples of the former, elves of the latter. It increases the ability to see things clearly on a certain multiple, not a standard radius.

Darkvision, on the other hand, generally allows one to see within a standard radius even in non-lit conditions. Monstrous humanoids do have darkvision.

I suggest you take a more animal-like approach for Brenna, yet choose the monstrous humanoid approach for Azrai.

[irdeggman]

Originally posted by RaspK_FOG@Mar 2 2004, 07:19 PM

In any case, infravision actually has been converted into two different things: the variable keenness of eyesight in limited light intensity, known as "low-light vision", and the standard-effect non-light-based visual acuity, known as "darkvision".

True, but not for BR. BR as a setting already had in place a low light vision mechanism, it was called star light vision and Cerilian elves had it.

The blood ability descriptions in 2nd ed were pretty clear on this subject. Azrai could see through shadows - you can&#39;t have a shadow without light.

If the designers had meant for the Brenna blood ability to be star light vision they would have stated so, since the mechanism was already in place to use this. While not stated that Azra had star light vision the description was awfully similar to it. IMO they did not want both bloodlines to have the &#39;same&#39; ability so they gave Brenna infravision instead to make them different. Although they could have just been lazy, a very viable possibility given what was going on at TSR at the time.

Bottom line is that this blood ability has not been changed since the BRCS came out in Feb &#39;03. Up until now there have been no comments concerning it. The same goes for the Long Life ability. It is simply too late in the process to start to revisit the basic things like this - or we will never make any progress.

These are definitely house-rules-able types of issues.

So I don&#39;t intend to change either of these blood abilities.

I am reserving the right to change the blood abilities bloodform and bloodtrait since the final forms depend on how Awnshegh and Ershegh are handled which has yet to be decided.

I&#39;m waiting for Osprey to supply me with modified random tables to reduce the frequencey of the appearance of Long Life. But there will be a finite amount of time I&#39;ll wait. I need the &#39;new&#39; tables by March 13th so that I can incorporate them and post out the &#39;final&#39; version by the 15th in order to start the sanctioning vote, which I plan on leaving open for 2 weeks only. This chapter has been the one that has had the most discussion, and attention of all of them. There have been polls, variations posted, etc. It is time to wrap this one up and move on to the next one.

Remember the point is to produce a &#39;base line&#39; document that most can agree to use when writing any adventures, etc. The document should also be house-rules-able for those (most likely everyone) who want to apply their own interpretations/concepts. This document is not supposed to include everyone&#39;s house-rules, we&#39;d never get it done if we did that.

I&#39;m not trying to be rude, but I need to be forceful in pursuing completion of the product which means sometimes coming off as abrupt. :D

[BrennanHawkwood]

Originally posted by irdeggman@Mar 3 2004, 01:28 PM

I&#39;m not trying to be rude, but I need to be forceful in pursuing completion of the product which means sometimes coming off as abrupt. :D
Not rude or abrupt at all...especially given the earlier explanation that this chapter was pretty much done and should be considered final.

Thanks for taking the time to explain the reasons though, its a subtle thing, but for me it did move it from..."huh, that doesn&#39;t make sense, why the heck did the designers do that" to "heh, silly original rule didn&#39;t make sense either." :)

Keep up the great work&#33;

-- Blair Monroe

[Osprey]

I&#39;m waiting for Osprey to supply me with modified random tables to reduce the frequencey of the appearance of Long Life. But there will be a finite amount of time I&#39;ll wait. I need the &#39;new&#39; tables by March 13th so that I can incorporate them and post out the &#39;final&#39; version by the 15th in order to start the sanctioning vote, which I plan on leaving open for 2 weeks only. This chapter has been the one that has had the most discussion, and attention of all of them. There have been polls, variations posted, etc. It is time to wrap this one up and move on to the next one.


OK, thanks for stating that as a specific deadline - I didn&#39;t know what kind of time I had. Also, thank you very much for posting these revisions in Word and pdf format, as the Word document can be easily edited if I want to rewrite something (like change the doc b4 I print it for my house-rulesable game). B) I&#39;ll see how it goes with the tables, been kinda busy with school, hopefully I can squeeze it all in.

-Osprey

[RaspK_FOG]

I&#39;m not trying to be rude, but I need to be forceful in pursuing completion of the product which means sometimes coming off as abrupt. :D

Don&#39;t you worry, we understand perfectly well; there are other&#39;s here who want to bite your head off for being somewhat (even though understandably and reasonably) late, you don&#39;t want to make something that both conflicts the original and dealys you further. That&#39;s just B) for us&#33;

[Osprey]

A few things came up as I&#39;ve been reading the revised Ch. 2 and comparing to both the BRCS and the original 2e rulebook.

1st, a question: Although bloodline scores are now double the BRCS values, the templates still add the same bonus to bloodline scores, i.e., +4 for Major and +8 for Great. This effectively halves the bonuses from the BRCS versions. Was this intentional as a means of balancing out the other benefits of scion levels, or is this an oversight in the conversion process?

2nd: OK, this one&#39;s stickier...Irdeggman, sorry, I only just caught it...

Concerning heirs and the inheritance of bloodlines through birth. On p. 1 it says,
Children always share the bloodline derivation of one of their parents. This derivation is generally inherited from the parent with the strongest bloodline, although this is not always the case. The bloodline strength of the child is generally that of the parent having the weakest bloodline strength (or minor, if one of the parents is non-blooded).

As an example, this would mean a Great Bloodline of Anduiras mated with a Major Bloodline of Reynir would "generally" produce a Major Bloodline of Anduiras.

What this means, though, is that Great bloodlines can only be sustained over the generations by mating Great with Great or True bloodlines&#33; Given the extreme rarity of Great bloodlines, how are there any surviving Great bloodlines at all? We are talking about 2000 years of breeding here, and inbreeding would be taking a very serious toll by this time among the Great bloodlines of Cerilia if most of them are the products of natural birth.

I read through the original 2e Rulebook to check on what they said about it. Naturally, it was somewhat ambiguous. The thing is, usually when they talk about Bloodline Strength they&#39;re referring to the bloodline score rather than the minor/major/great designation. For 2e purposes this wasn&#39;t a big deal because those designators were just general measures for the sake of game flavor, and Bloodline Score (usually called Bloodline Strength except in the table on p. 20) was what mattered the most. Now, with the 3.5 class templates and the (3.5) Bloodline Strength limiting the powers available, it matters a lot...

What the 2e Rulebook had to say about children was that the parents&#39; scores are averaged, the weaker bloodline diluting the stronger one. But it did not say what happened to the designator (major, great, etc.).

OK, I see that on pp. 16-17 of the Book of Regency it gets more specific, and spells out that the weaker designator dominates - I take it this was your basis for the Ch. 2 section I quoted above. Almost word for word...

What confuses this a whole lot is that just about every heir mentioned in Ruins of Empire has the same designator as their regent parent. So does every Avan regent manage to find a Great bloodline to join with? Does every Avan regent use Investiture to make certain they keep the Great bloodline? Sure that&#39;s ideal, but none of them die before this can be completed?

Well, I know the Book of Regency is highly regarded as a good authority on the matter, so I doubt the revised chapter 2 will change...but I think it would be good to somehow account for the existence of the remaining Great bloodlines, because it seems that marriage and birth just wouldn&#39;t be nearly enough to preserve any of them by this time, unless we assume that there is quite a lot of inbreeding, which has many, many problems of its own, especially in a world as small as Cerilia.

Working within the existing system, then, I think 2 things must be assumed: regents with major bloodlines do in fact raise them to Great lines more often than it might be believed, and Bloodline Investiture is perhaps common for those lucky regents who make it to old age and can voluntarily pass on rulership to their heirs...

IMO, the 2nd option just seems a stretch for human nature. How many kings of Europe "retired" from rulership? How many dictators just step down? It seems to me that as a general rule of human nature, the greater the power a person wields, the harder it is to relinquish it voluntarily. And a blooded regent, whose power is intrinsic and literally a birthright would, I think, have a REALLY hard time letting it go unless he&#39;s on his deathbed...

Well, I expect that Ch 2 will remain as it is in this respect. However, for those who follow this and might enjoy an alternative sytem, I&#39;ll post a variant system I recently devised for determining bloodlines of children.

[irdeggman]

Osprey,
I think you answered your own question by finding the reference in the BoR.

The strength of the bloodlines is dying out, which is what the BoR (and the BRCS) is referring to. There are fewer Great bloodlines than there was a millennia ago, these are most likely the remnants of the True bloodlines.

The next generation in Cerilia willl produce fewer Great bloodlines and so on and so on.

This is why &#39;arranged marriages&#39; are so common, it is also why the regents are concerning with dalliances with the common folk and having their bloodline diluted even further in the offspring produced.

It is possible to raise a bloodline back up to Great status by performing necessary things outlined in Chap 2 (real similar to those outlined in the BoR). This reflects a reclaiming of fame and stature - but is extremely rare and like it says "the stuff of legends".

The reason that &#39;usually&#39; was used instead of &#39;always&#39; is that the moment you make a definitive statement like that an exception immediately pops up. There could be times when the strength of the bloodline itself (referring to the familial bloodline not just the Great/Major/Minor label) will not die out. For example the Roele bloodline would be one, IMO, that would not die out or at the very least die out very reluctantly and slowly over time.

Now, Osprey get back to your writer&#39;s cove and get me my revised tables. ;)

[RaspK_FOG]

Err... I forgot to add a note on my earlier Long Life suggestion: the values I gave worked on a "per level" basis, just like the Slow Aging class feature of channelers in the Wheel of Time. I will repost here, with errata:

Long Life
You age less rapidly.
Minor: You age 1 year only for every 2 years per level.
Major: You age 1 year only for every 5 years per level.
Great: You age 1 year only for every 10 years per level.

For example, a 20th level scion with the minor Long Life blood ability would age 1 year in 40 years, while a 1st level scion with the great Long Life blood ability would age 1 year in 10 years; however, if the second scion was also of 20th level, he would age that one year in 200 years&#33;

[The Jew]

The realm spell bloodline investure is the reason the great bloodlines have not died out. To quote the BRCS "A bloodline investure transfers the donating scion&#39;s entire bloodline, including strength, derivation and score to the designated recipient...If the target character is already a scion then the bloodlines are combined in exactly the same manner as if the character with the stronger bloodline performed bloodtheft on the character with the weaker bloodline." Now of course their are a variety of reasons a regent may not live to have this spell used, which would account for the number of great bloodlines decreasing. ;)

[Osprey]

Err... I forgot to add a note on my earlier Long Life suggestion: the values I gave worked on a "per level" basis, just like the Slow Aging class feature of channelers in the Wheel of Time. I will repost here, with errata:

Long Life
You age less rapidly.
Minor: You age 1 year only for every 2 years per level.
Major: You age 1 year only for every 5 years per level.
Great: You age 1 year only for every 10 years per level.

For example, a 20th level scion with the minor Long Life blood ability would age 1 year in 40 years, while a 1st level scion with the great Long Life blood ability would age 1 year in 10 years; however, if the second scion was also of 20th level, he would age that one year in 200 years&#33;

That&#39;s a pretty clever system, and quite appropriate...for channelers of the One Power. ;) But BR bloodline powers shouldn&#39;t generally be level-based if we are to keep consistent. However, if level were to be replaced with Bloodline score modifier, it might translate rather nicely. Just a suggestion, Rasp.

-Osprey

[Osprey]

Originally posted by The Jew@Mar 6 2004, 10:57 PM
The realm spell bloodline investure is the reason the great bloodlines have not died out. To quote the BRCS "A bloodline investure transfers the donating scion&#39;s entire bloodline, including strength, derivation and score to the designated recipient...If the target character is already a scion then the bloodlines are combined in exactly the same manner as if the character with the stronger bloodline performed bloodtheft on the character with the weaker bloodline." Now of course their are a variety of reasons a regent may not live to have this spell used, which would account for the number of great bloodlines decreasing. ;)
I&#39;ve always imagined that the use of the realm spell, which robs a regent/scion of his/her bloodline entirely, should work differently than pacifistic bloodtheft (bloodtheft without actually killing the victim). I would expect that a regent who passed his bloodline on to his heir could give his heir the full benefit of it. So if Hierl Diem raised his Bloodline to 56, and was ready to pass it on to Lasisca (42) before he died, that Lasisca would gain a Bloodline score of 56 rather than the measly few points she would get through the Bloodtheft rules. This would allow regents to give their heirs the full benefit of a bloodline forged through a successful reign, rather than a slight "boost" for such a great loss.

Now is this just wishful thinking on my part, or did such a mechanic exist somewhere to this effect? I feel like I got this idea from somewhere, perhaps in the 2e materials?

[Don E]

Originally posted by Osprey@Mar 7 2004, 01:58 PM
I&#39;ve always imagined that the use of the realm spell, which robs a regent/scion of his/her bloodline entirely, should work differently than pacifistic bloodtheft (bloodtheft without actually killing the victim). I would expect that a regent who passed his bloodline on to his heir could give his heir the full benefit of it. So if Hierl Diem raised his Bloodline to 56, and was ready to pass it on to Lasisca (42) before he died, that Lasisca would gain a Bloodline score of 56 rather than the measly few points she would get through the Bloodtheft rules. This would allow regents to give their heirs the full benefit of a bloodline forged through a successful reign, rather than a slight "boost" for such a great loss.

Now is this just wishful thinking on my part, or did such a mechanic exist somewhere to this effect? I feel like I got this idea from somewhere, perhaps in the 2e materials?

I believe this has for some unknown reason been changed from 2e to the BRCS. In the BoP it states that a ceremony of Bloodline Investiture can be used to elevate a ruler&#39;s heir to the same blood strength that the ruler himself enjoys.

Based on this I would say that you are indeed right. My interpretation would be that if your bloodline is stronger than the donor you only receive an increase as for a bloofteft. If your bloodline is weaker you gain the full bloodline. Another way of looking at this is to assume there is some actual benefit of performing a blood investiture instead of simply performing bloodteft on the victim.

Cheers,
Don E

[RaspK_FOG]

Originally posted by Osprey@Mar 7 2004, 03:50 PM

Err... I forgot to add a note on my earlier Long Life suggestion: the values I gave worked on a "per level" basis, just like the Slow Aging class feature of channelers in the Wheel of Time. I will repost here, with errata:

Long Life
You age less rapidly.
Minor: You age 1 year only for every 2 years per level.
Major: You age 1 year only for every 5 years per level.
Great: You age 1 year only for every 10 years per level.

For example, a 20th level scion with the minor Long Life blood ability would age 1 year in 40 years, while a 1st level scion with the great Long Life blood ability would age 1 year in 10 years; however, if the second scion was also of 20th level, he would age that one year in 200 years&#33;

That&#39;s a pretty clever system, and quite appropriate...for channelers of the One Power. ;) But BR bloodline powers shouldn&#39;t generally be level-based if we are to keep consistent. However, if level were to be replaced with Bloodline score modifier, it might translate rather nicely. Just a suggestion, Rasp.

-Osprey
:lol: That was one funny remark there&#33;

I will think this over, but it looks you hit the nail too squarely for me to judge it any... As it is, I still have to ask you one thing: how do you think I should go with Bloodline scores? Should I work like the margines of the various strengths (1 to 20, 21 to..., and so on?), or do you have something else in mind?

[Osprey]

Rasp,
The revised Ch. 2 Bloodline Score tables have modifiers which are pretty similar to their BRCS equivalents, only slightly higher. That&#39;s what i was referring to. In the new tables, a Bloodline score of 30 has a +3 modifier, so a scion with this score and Long Life (Major) would age 1 year per 15 that passed, using your system as a base. Clear?

Ideggman, a question: Is there any particular reason why the Bloodline Modifiers in revised Ch. 2 are almost the same as the BRCS, but slightly higher? I was curious about that, as it makes for a slightly skewed conversion between the 2 systems. Not a big deal, just seemed a liitle odd.

-Osprey

[irdeggman]

Originally posted by Osprey@Mar 8 2004, 12:10 AM
Rasp,
The revised Ch. 2 Bloodline Score tables have modifiers which are pretty similar to their BRCS equivalents, only slightly higher. That&#39;s what i was referring to. In the new tables, a Bloodline score of 30 has a +3 modifier, so a scion with this score and Long Life (Major) would age 1 year per 15 that passed, using your system as a base. Clear?

Ideggman, a question: Is there any particular reason why the Bloodline Modifiers in revised Ch. 2 are almost the same as the BRCS, but slightly higher? I was curious about that, as it makes for a slightly skewed conversion between the 2 systems. Not a big deal, just seemed a liitle odd.

-Osprey
Yes,
Based on a &#39;conversion&#39; of the 2nd ed tables, the blood abilities start to come into play routinely at a blood score of 20 (0-100 range). In the BRCS-playtest they came in at around an equivalent 0-100 score range of 24. Making this adjustment moved things so that the modifiers and abilities started to come in at a lower range, but translates truer to the original material than did the BRCS-playtest.

[RaspK_FOG]

Osprey, I have read the Revised 2nd Chapter; let this insolent fool of a poster admit that his improficiency allowed him to make even more a fool of himself... In other words, I can be such a moron sometimes&#33; :(

[Osprey]

Irdeggman,
Before voting, I have one question concerning the addition of prerequisites for all of the blood abilities: Am I right in interpreting this to mean that if my character takes Divine Aura (Great), I also have to already possess Divine Aura (Major)? If this is true, it will seriously reduce the number of blood abilities possessed by major and great scions. Also, it seems to encourage scions to go for the abilities that don&#39;t have lesser ability prerequisites, as they end up with fewer usable abilities.

Or does this mean that when I take Divine Aura (Great), I must first have the Major version, but when I take the Great version it replaces the lesser (major) version and I may now choose a different major version in its place?

Either way, I would very much appreciate some kind of text better explaining the prerequisites in the chapter, as I looked several times and could find no answer within the existing text. Not to mention this is a brand new addition to the rules with no real precedent. Is this addition for the sake of making it in-line with other 3.5 systems or what? It certainly seems a dramatic change to any previous systems.

Osprey

[irdeggman]

Originally posted by Osprey@Mar 12 2004, 07:24 PM
Irdeggman,
Before voting, I have one question concerning the addition of prerequisites for all of the blood abilities: Am I right in interpreting this to mean that if my character takes Divine Aura (Great), I also have to already possess Divine Aura (Major)? If this is true, it will seriously reduce the number of blood abilities possessed by major and great scions. Also, it seems to encourage scions to go for the abilities that don&#39;t have lesser ability prerequisites, as they end up with fewer usable abilities.

Or does this mean that when I take Divine Aura (Great), I must first have the Major version, but when I take the Great version it replaces the lesser (major) version and I may now choose a different major version in its place?

Either way, I would very much appreciate some kind of text better explaining the prerequisites in the chapter, as I looked several times and could find no answer within the existing text. Not to mention this is a brand new addition to the rules with no real precedent. Is this addition for the sake of making it in-line with other 3.5 systems or what? It certainly seems a dramatic change to any previous systems.

Osprey
This is the text that is applicable: (from pg 11)



"Blood abilities
Scions of divine bloodlines may possess unusual talents or powers associated with their line. These powers are known as blood abilities. Bloodline abilities have three designated strengths (minor, major, or great) and are associated with one or more derivations. The number and strength of the blood abilities that a character possesses is determined by the character&#39;s bloodline traits (see Table 2-3: Bloodline Score). Bloodline abilities should be chosen from the derivation specific tables, below. Any blood abilities of the appropriate strengths and derivations may be selected, as long as any designated prerequisites are met. A player may choose an ability of lesser strength than they are entitled to, at their preference. For example, if the scion is entitled to have one minor, one major and one great ability he can choose to have all minors, two minors and a great, one minor and two majors, etc. The tables also provide numbers for the convenience of DMs using the random bloodline traits variant.

For most characters, bloodline abilities generally first manifest at puberty and remain constant throughout their life. Blood abilities, however, may be gained or lost as a character&#39;s bloodline score changes during play. If a character’s score increases to the point where a new ability is gained, then select an ability of the appropriate level from the tables below. If the character already possesses the ability at a lower level of strength, then an ability of the appropriate strength should be selected to replace the lower ability as well. The character should always end up with the appropriate number of Great, Major, and Minor abilities as indicated on Table 2-2: Bloodline Score. "



Unless it is specifically addressed as a prerequisite then having a minor prior to taking a major version of the blood ability or major then taking a great it is not a requirement. All prerequisites are specified. The only thing that must be met prior to taking a major or great ability is the appropriate blod score and the appropriate number of scion class levels. Any required prequisites are listed under the description of the blood ability itself, for example for major regeneration the following is in the specific text for the ability "*This ability is available only to those blooded scions that already possess natural regeneration (usually through the Regeneration blood ability).". This pattern is similarly followed for any abilities that have prequisites.


I added the following text under scion classes:

"In order to obtain major level blood abilities a scion must have a level of the applicable scion class. In order to obtain great blood abilities a scion must have two levels of the appropriate scion class."

I hope that helps, if not I&#39;m at a loss for how much clearer it could be written.

If using the feat-like approach variant the prerequisite table listed there applies, but table 2-5 only applies to that variant, which is why the table is specifically called out under that variant alone.

The prequisites were in the BRCS-playtest version and really haven&#39;t been changed, except that instead of a template they are now scion class levels.

[Osprey]

If using the feat-like approach variant the prerequisite table listed there applies, but table 2-5 only applies to that variant, which is why the table is specifically called out under that variant alone.


Ahh...therein lies the rub&#33; I didn&#39;t realize that table was only for the feat variant. Problem solved...thanks&#33;