Game Balance in BRCS

[epicsoul]

After posting in another thread, wherein I state I don't care about game balance, I was wondering what people have noticed about game balance in this setting since BRCS playtest version came out.

Here was an interesting one: due to the magic rare setting, one feat stood out as being very powerful in my last campaign.

Improved Trip. Due to the lack of as many aberrations running around, other than dwarves and cavalry fights, most of your opponents end up being 2 legged. The vos fighter was kicking ass because of this. I ended up having to nerf the +4 bonus to trip attempts down to a +2.

Another one:

Shadow Magic feat. Using this in conjunction with Phantasmal Killer, as well as Spell Focus feats makes for a mage assasin of unspeakable power. That extra +2 DC for a 4th level spell that can kill instantly is highly disruptive. Assume the wizard/sorcerer has a +3 from ability score, +1 for lesser spell focus, +4 from spell level, and now +2 from Shadowmagic, and a seventh level character can cast a DC 20 instant death spell. Nice.

There's a few others, will post. Anybody else notice a few?

[Magnus Argent]

After posting in another thread, wherein I state I don't care about game balance, I was wondering what people have noticed about game balance in this setting since BRCS playtest version came out.

Here was an interesting one: due to the magic rare setting, one feat stood out as being very powerful in my last campaign.

Improved Trip. Due to the lack of as many aberrations running around, other than dwarves and cavalry fights, most of your opponents end up being 2 legged. The vos fighter was kicking ass because of this. I ended up having to nerf the +4 bonus to trip attempts down to a +2.

Another one:

Shadow Magic feat. Using this in conjunction with Phantasmal Killer, as well as Spell Focus feats makes for a mage assasin of unspeakable power. That extra +2 DC for a 4th level spell that can kill instantly is highly disruptive. Assume the wizard/sorcerer has a +3 from ability score, +1 for lesser spell focus, +4 from spell level, and now +2 from Shadowmagic, and a seventh level character can cast a DC 20 instant death spell. Nice.

There's a few others, will post. Anybody else notice a few?

There are pleanty of monsters outside of aberrations that have more than two feet. Animals, magical beasts, and oozes are all pretty tough to trip. And some two-legged monsters can be difficult to trip, too.. such as giants (due to their size) and fey (high dexterity). Even if you choose to make humans the primary enemy in battles, you can have them mounted on war horses, opening up a whole new vista of feats for practical use.

As for the Shadow Magic and Spell Focus feats, I suggest bringing them in line with 3.5th edition rules. I'd probably have Shadow Magic grant +1 caster level instead of a bonus to the spell's DC and Spell Focus grants +1 to DC rather than +2. Greater Spell Focus grants +1 as well, which stacks with Spell Focus for a total of +2 DC.

Remember, Phantasmal Killer grants 2 saving throws. The first is a will saving throw, which, granted isn't all that great for fighter-types. But it also grants a Fortitude saving throw which Fighter types do well with. And remember, Phantasmal Killer has the Mind Affecting and Fear descriptors.. Paladins with Auras of Courage are immune and their allies benefit from a +4 morale bonus to their saving throws vs fear effects. Defenses against mind affecting spells apply to Phantasmal Killer, too.

[epicsoul]

Re: Improved trip - Giants are a good one, but are also not really an appropriate CR for low level parties. As for animals, I guess I just don't have the party fight that many animals, due to the fact of having a ranger in the party - it sort of limits how many angry animals attack the party. I mentioned cavalry, of course. Hell, the paladin of Cuiracaen charged with a lance on an elf that they were fighting, and did incredible damage with a single hit.

As for oozes, they just don't seem to be a very BR specific critter. I use them very sparingly. Magical creatures, those have only started to be used.

As for Shadowmagic - your point about the 2 saves is valid. Still doesn't help rogues or even wizards much. Fighters, paladins, and clerics are quite safe, as their attributes focus towards these saves. But then, paladins are safe all around for saves...

One interesting thing about the dwarven resistance to bludgeoning damage... dwarves can't get into fist fights with each other. Not that I can see dwarves doing that, even drunkenly anyways... but no other race EVER better pick a bar brawl with a dwarf.

[irdeggman]

Re: Improved trip.

Dwarves get a bonus against trip attacks; elves get a bonus to Dex (hence a bonus against trip attacks); mounted combat (which should be a whole lot more frequent in Birthright than in a standard setting – especially in Anuire, Khinasi and Vos lands pretty much negate most trip attacks (size and 4 leg bonus for horses)

[irdeggman]

As for oozes, they just don't seem to be a very BR specific critter. I use them very sparingly. Magical creatures, those have only started to be used.

True - not specific to the setting but allowed. In the 2nd ed material oozes were listed as a "common" monster in BR. Pretty much reproduced in Ch 9 of the BRCS.

Undead are much more common, albeit time and place specific e.g., when the Shadow World and "normal" world are closer.


One interesting thing about the dwarven resistance to bludgeoning damage... dwarves can't get into fist fights with each other. Not that I can see dwarves doing that, even drunkenly anyways... but no other race EVER better pick a bar brawl with a dwarf.

This was something that was specifically brought up in the discussion on including DR for a dwarven ability. Dwarven barfights would seem logical to last a very long time. In the 2nd ed material dwarves suffered only 1/2 damage from bludgeoning weapons so pretty much the same thing would have happened.

But grapple a dwarf (no special resistance to gappling only bull rushing and tripping) and throw them into the river to find out if they "sink" (-4 to swim and tumble checks).

[irdeggman]

As for animals, I guess I just don't have the party fight that many animals, due to the fact of having a ranger in the party - it sort of limits how many angry animals attack the party.

Why?

A ranger doesn't automatically calm all animals. So an animal that is predisposed to atacking,(i.e., has been stalking the prey like a wild and hungrey wolfpack) will not be affected by the ranger's wild empathy since there generally won't be sufficient time to work that ranger mojo.



Wild Empathy (Ex): A ranger can improve the attitude of an animal. This ability functions just like a Diplomacy check to improve the attitude of a person. The ranger rolls 1d20 and adds his ranger level and his Charisma bonus to determine the wild empathy check result. The typical domestic animal has a starting attitude of indifferent, while wild animals are usually unfriendly
.
To use wild empathy, the ranger and the animal must be able to study each other, which means that they must be within 30 feet of one another under normal visibility conditions. Generally, influencing an animal in this way takes 1 minute, but, as with influencing people, it might take more or less time.

The ranger can also use this ability to influence a magical beast with an Intelligence score of 1 or 2, but he takes a –4 penalty on the check.

[epicsoul]

Re: Improved trip.

Dwarves get a bonus against trip attacks; elves get a bonus to Dex (hence a bonus against trip attacks); mounted combat (which should be a whole lot more frequent in Birthright than in a standard setting – especially in Anuire, Khinasi and Vos lands pretty much negate most trip attacks (size and 4 leg bonus for horses)

Yeah... I listed all those in my initial post. Dwarves and cavalry. However, I didn't want these to become the most common opponents in the game either. Just wanted to point out that in magic-rare settings, as 2 legged creatures are more the norm for threats, improved trip is more powerful... as are other feats that focus on fighting those adversaries. Elven dex bonus notwithstanding, perhaps I am just looking at it all the wrong way. We had a fighter with a 16 str, so +3, with a +4 from improved trip, with a heavy flail. The extra +4 means that even against an elf with a high dex, the odds were in favour of the fighter... and then, even if the elf won in the first shot, would probably not win the reversed trip.

Anyways, I just found that it was VERY useful in the campaign, due to the lack of the more traditional D&D beasties abounding.

[epicsoul]

Why?

A ranger doesn't automatically calm all animals. So an animal that is predisposed to atacking,(i.e., has been stalking the prey like a wild and hungrey wolfpack) will not be affected by the ranger's wild empathy since there generally won't be sufficient time to work that ranger mojo.

[/FONT][/COLOR]


Sure, but again, the problem is, how many times do you realistically stalk the party with hungry animals that go after people? ... let alone having someone else in the party with Animal Affinity - Major, Reynir - so wolves were right out. That left the traditional lions, tigers and bears...

[irdeggman]

Sure, but again, the problem is, how many times do you realistically stalk the party with hungry animals that go after people? ... let alone having someone else in the party with Animal Affinity - Major, Reynir - so wolves were right out. That left the traditional lions, tigers and bears...

Or the encounter can be mutually unaware.

Other than the Reynir blood ability (which depends on how many PCs you have with it) time is the real factor in handling the ranger ability. It is not automatic.

Seems to me that you have a pretty specialized set of encounters that are mostly human on human and on foot type.

In those types of encounters certain feats become real useful, but they drop in usefulness in other encounter types.

Flying creatures (stirges are real nasty) or swarms (swarms can ruin even a high level party's day).

In a mostly domain level based campaign the "normal" combat oriented feats are relatively useless and people will focus on the domain level ones and those like skill focus that can have an effect on that level of play.

It really depends highly on the type of game you are running as to whether certain feats are notably more useful than other. Well not all feats are created equal anyway, but the type of game has a large effect.

Oh yeah and trip is useless against a ranged attack.

[epicsoul]

Or the encounter can be mutually unaware.

Other than the Reynir blood ability (which depends on how many PCs you have with it) time is the real factor in handling the ranger ability. It is not automatic.

Seems to me that you have a pretty specialized set of encounters that are mostly human on human and on foot type.

In those types of encounters certain feats become real useful, but they drop in usefulness in other encounter types.

Flying creatures (stirges are real nasty) or swarms (swarms can ruin even a high level party's day).

In a mostly domain level based campaign the "normal" combat oriented feats are relatively useless and people will focus on the domain level ones and those like skill focus that can have an effect on that level of play.

It really depends highly on the type of game you are running as to whether certain feats are notably more useful than other. Well not all feats are created equal anyway, but the type of game has a large effect.

Oh yeah and trip is useless against a ranged attack.

True. I don't actually usually play domain level anymore, finding BR a rich enough setting to play at the adventuring level only. Or if I do, it is domain level-light. How so? Well, 2 of the characters now have a charter to be allowed to open holdings in Roesone and have sworn fealty to Baroness Roesone, and are allowed to have a county sworn to her... with the paladin building a temple. So far, a law 1 holding, and a temple 0, plus the province of Ghoried (given by the Baroness with their oath). The party mage has no intention of trying to take source holdings from Aelies or Aglondier. The paladin intends to launch a crusade against Osoerde (he's of Cuiracaen), long term. All the money that has gone towards their holdings is from adventuring, and a loan from El-hadid.

I guess a lot of the higher level critters haven't been used in my arsenal yet... the party is only 5th level now. Stirges are a good one, though. Will remember that. A lot of the creatures they have been fighting have been fairly mundane... or undead. So, it has been a choice, by me, so far, as it has fit the theme of the campaign. Changing up their adversaries every once in awhile could be nice, I suppose.

[epicsoul]

LOL. So far, the party has no domain level feats at all. So I have few concerns about them unbalancing it that way. My wife is playing a Rjurik barbarian though, with a very high Con (18 now, after she was able to raise her attributes), and took hardiness... she has more hitpoints than almost the rest of the party put together when she rages. She took toughness and endurance as well...

Magic has also been somewhat unbalancing to the game, but again, that is more by my choice as a DM than anything... keeping it magic LOW, not just magic rare, as is often spoken of, has had a major, and enjoyable, impact.

Looking back, my few points are also more likely due to the fact that I have made choices as a DM in the adversaries the party fights rather than any inherent imbalance in the system. I still argue that due to the setting itself, certain feats may be more useful than others, but hey, I guess a min/maxer will find those no matter what setting you play.

One thing: running magic-low worlds, it is AMAZING how many players opt to take combat expertise. Even non-fighters...

[Starmage21]

the largest part of an armored character's AC is from his magic.

Base AC: 10
Full Plate + Large Shield = +10 AC
then you can get +10 more from enhancement bonuses to both armor and shield.
+5 Natural Armor (Amulet of Natural Armor)
+5 Deflection (ring of protection)
= 40 AC

A full BAB character with the right feats and magic gear will only have trouble hitting with iterative attacks.
BAB 20
+5 Enhancement on the Sword
+2 Greater Weapon Focus(for Fighters)
+3 or more for strength (assuming started with 15)


Then you get to "low" magic worlds or campaigns
Full Plate + Shield +10 AC
maybe +5 or less from enhancement bonuses on the armor+shield if at all
maybe +2 or 3 from a magical ring and/or the necklace
total ac around 30ish or less depending on the rarity the DM makes magical items

the full BAB fighter still has
+20 BAB
+3 or more from strength
+2 greater weapon focus
thats +30 right there, meaning there is going to be alot of power attacking going on, and/or advanced combat maneuvers not neccessarily used as much in a "normal" setting.


on that note, if youre in a low magic world, the strength of the party's wizard increases exponentially, especially if he's inclined to craft items for the party.

Ive always understood Birthright to be High Magic, but low magic-item anyway. The only thing that holds it back is the culture surrounding magic in general.

[irdeggman]

Don't forget the "bonus" hit points that a regent gets. That can add up fairly quickly.

[irdeggman]

LOL. So far, the party has no domain level feats at all. So I have few concerns about them unbalancing it that way. My wife is playing a Rjurik barbarian though, with a very high Con (18 now, after she was able to raise her attributes), and took hardiness... she has more hitpoints than almost the rest of the party put together when she rages. She took toughness and endurance as well...

ON the other hand there are a lot of games that are moslty domain level - where the combat feats are mostly ignored.


One thing: running magic-low worlds, it is AMAZING how many players opt to take combat expertise. Even non-fighters...

Actually combat expertise is becoming a very popular feat even in "normal" worlds - geting up there with Power Attack. Check out the EnWorld boards to see how many times that feat is recomended.

[irdeggman]

on that note, if youre in a low magic world, the strength of the party's wizard increases exponentially, especially if he's inclined to craft items for the party.


Double the xp costs and see how "inclined" they become.

[epicsoul]

Nah, I don't double the xp, I just make them search for the material components for items. And also for their spell components as well.

[Starmage21]

its still not a significant reduction in XP. A potion of say fireball(10th) still only costs 60 XP, or that plain +5 sword costs 4,000XP (thats not too much at 15th caster level required to make it).

[irdeggman]

its still not a significant reduction in XP. A potion of say fireball(10th) still only costs 60 XP, or that plain +5 sword costs 4,000XP (thats not too much at 15th caster level required to make it).

It is when they are used to it costing half of that.

Not counting the amount of complaining some people do because it costs xp to create magic items in the first place.

[RaspK_FOG]

Well, those 4.000 XP certainly aren't that much; then again, at level 15, you really start thinking about more than a "plain +5 sword." On the other hand, I would really love seeing anyone downing a potion of Fireball. :D

[Starmage21]

Well, those 4.000 XP certainly aren't that much; then again, at level 15, you really start thinking about more than a "plain +5 sword." On the other hand, I would really love seeing anyone downing a potion of Fireball. :D


Actually, when I wrote that, I was thinking more along the lines of an Oil of Fireball, which is a homeade item my group uses in F2F games. Basically, the definition of oil says it must be "smeared" to take effect. If you throw an Oil of Fireball as a grenade-like weapon, the splash generates the spell effect. Simple, and effective for use in mass combats as a high level (when 750gp isnt that much).

[gazza666]

Not counting the amount of complaining some people do because it costs xp to create magic items in the first place.
I wouldn't say that I complain about that, but it is pretty illogical. It is hard to see why making magical items actually makes you a less powerful spellcaster.

Of course, there has to be some sort of cost, and it's preferable to losing permanent points of Con (which was what happened in 2nd edition). We generally use the Unearthed Arcana crafting stuff, and the DM has already OKed the variant rule whereby we can use regency instead of XP.

[gazza666]

One thing about the domain level rules which is kind of annoying - the inability to oppose the Rule Province domain action in any way. Really sucks to be a source regent at the mercy of any idiot realm regent that wants to increase his population.

Indeed, being a source regent can be quite painful. In our campaign, the other two PCs are a guild based regent and a realm (ie province + law) regent, and I'm the source regent. It is true that we're elves, so I don't face the issue of population pressure within the elven realm (though I've already been hurt by one of my source holdings outside), but here are a short list of why being the source guy hurts:

Wealth. The guild regent has a tremendous potential income, and the realm regent is also quite high (higher than the guild guy at the moment, because the latter is a bit restricted by how fast the population can support the bigger guilds he wants to build). Even if I somehow found a way to get 3 times my bloodline in Regency every season - which is of course impossible - I still couldn't possibly compete even if I did nothing but cast Alchemy. It is true, of course, that my expenses are much less (I have a single lieutenant and no court), but our relative incomes dwarf this issue.
Character actions. I virtually never have any, since I have to use full domain actions to do most things (such as rule my source holdings, create trade routes for my virtual guilds, and so forth). My lieutenant comes in handy if I want to spy or agitate, or possibly engage in diplomacy (that's rare, though, given the court penalty I would face).
Experience points. Our DM is using the variant that gives you XP whenever you successfully execute a domain action. Since my compatriots have courts (level 9 each, I believe), they often rule several holdings in a turn and get XP for each success. There is no way for me to emulate this; even if I had a court, ruling a source holding requires personal attention so it cannot effectively benefit from court actions. They're almost 1000XP ahead of me already (we're 2nd level, incidentally), and obviously that's going to get worse when I start crafting items.

It's not all bad - other than realm regents increasing their population, it's difficult to take away what a source regent attains. But I will probably never have any sort of army, for example, and in order to get my Magical Academy constructed (we're using extended wonders rules) I'm gathering the cash together so that I can transfer it along with a source holding to the guild regent, who will use his court actions to build it in a couple of months (it would take my character 10 months of domain actions) before transferring it back to me. I pity any poor NPCs that don't have this level of trust.

Basically, I'm hoping that realm spells will level the playing field to some degree.

[irdeggman]

One thing about the domain level rules which is kind of annoying - the inability to oppose the Rule Province domain action in any way. Really sucks to be a source regent at the mercy of any idiot realm regent that wants to increase his population.

Yes this is a real issue.

Check this thread out.

http://www.birthright.net/showthread.php?t=2781&highlight=rule+province

When we get down to revising the domain action chapter a section on using source holding to oppose or support rule province actions is highly likely.


Indeed, being a source regent can be quite painful. In our campaign, the other two PCs are a guild based regent and a realm (ie province + law) regent, and I'm the source regent. It is true that we're elves, so I don't face the issue of population pressure within the elven realm (though I've already been hurt by one of my source holdings outside), but here are a short list of why being the source guy hurts:

Wealth. The guild regent has a tremendous potential income, and the realm regent is also quite high (higher than the guild guy at the moment, because the latter is a bit restricted by how fast the population can support the bigger guilds he wants to build). Even if I somehow found a way to get 3 times my bloodline in Regency every season - which is of course impossible - I still couldn't possibly compete even if I did nothing but cast Alchemy. It is true, of course, that my expenses are much less (I have a single lieutenant and no court), but our relative incomes dwarf this issue.
Character actions. I virtually never have any, since I have to use full domain actions to do most things (such as rule my source holdings, create trade routes for my virtual guilds, and so forth). My lieutenant comes in handy if I want to spy or agitate, or possibly engage in diplomacy (that's rare, though, given the court penalty I would face).Most of this goes to emphasize the cooperative nature of the game. It is far better to work together than to work against each other (sort of like 3.x itself). A guild regent has the income, a temple regent has influence, a landed regent controls the armies and a source regent - well when it comes time to defend the land it real helpful to have a few well timed realm spells cast by an ally.


Experience points. Our DM is using the variant that gives you XP whenever you successfully execute a domain action. Since my compatriots have courts (level 9 each, I believe), they often rule several holdings in a turn and get XP for each success. There is no way for me to emulate this; even if I had a court, ruling a source holding requires personal attention so it cannot effectively benefit from court actions. They're almost 1000XP ahead of me already (we're 2nd level, incidentally), and obviously that's going to get worse when I start crafting items.Be careful with this one. This is supposed to be for overcoming domain level threats and not the things that can typcially be done via a court action.

Variant: Experience awards for domain actions

Regent characters gain experience for overcoming domain-level threats through domain actions. Experience gained for routine actions (base DC 14 or less) should be no more than 50 XP x the regent's level. Difficult actions (base DC 15-19) should provide no more than 75 XP x the regent's level. Very difficult actions (base DC 20+) and actions which are significantly opposed by the opposing regents should provide no more than 100 XP x the regent's level.

[epicsoul]

Be careful with this one. This is supposed to be for overcoming domain level threats and not the things that can typcially be done via a court action.

Variant: Experience awards for domain actions

Regent characters gain experience for overcoming domain-level threats through domain actions. Experience gained for routine actions (base DC 14 or less) should be no more than 50 XP x the regent's level. Difficult actions (base DC 15-19) should provide no more than 75 XP x the regent's level. Very difficult actions (base DC 20+) and actions which are significantly opposed by the opposing regents should provide no more than 100 XP x the regent's level.




Hmmm... I only give xp for the domain action. The court actions that supplement it I never give xp. That kept things a bit more equalized.

[irdeggman]

Hmmm... I only give xp for the domain action. The court actions that supplement it I never give xp. That kept things a bit more equalized.

That seems more in line with the concept and helps to mitigate the "issues" that gazza666 has expressed concern with.