How would you like to see Birthright done in the 4th edition?
Mabe you could remind us newer players what exactly makes birthright cooler than say Planescape or Eberon?
I am also a 'newer player' and never played it, but Birthright had PCs as descendants of the gods claiming kingdoms as their own and incorporating the running of these kingdoms into the game in a major way.
You don't need to play Birthright to have a campaign where you're a noble-born character, but Birthright includes mechanics for ruling a realm in addition to adventuring. We're only a few sessions into the campaign, but I'm really enjoying it.
For anyone who's curious about Birthright, go check out the Birthright Wiki at Birthright.net. It includes the 3.5 rules as well as information about Cerilia, the Birthright setting.
I'm still on the fence about converting to 4E, but I'd love to see renewed official support for Birthright.
As to ruling realms, that was almost obligatory in (very) old school D&D. In FR they've avoided this by having a plethora of we are more powerful than you characters to discourage realm building. There are certainly a lot of players who enjoy that sort of thing, incl. the possibility to have both a bloodline character, and other "loyals of the realm" to play, depending on the adventure. That's how we played it anyway ...
I'd buy a birthright book if it had good domain rules. A mass combat system wouldn't go amiss either.
Heros of battle has that covered. As a D.M. i like the world because the players are tied too an area and its easy too motivate (there is one player i have in mind when i say this) witch translates too better adventures. As a player i like the fact when some one asks were your power comes from i can say FROM THE BLOOD OF GODS!!! Plus im in charge of a kingdom. How can i say no.
Heros of battle has that covered. As a D.M. i like the world because the players are tied too an area and its easy too motivate (there is one player i have in mind when i say this) witch translates too better adventures. As a player i like the fact when some one asks were your power comes from i can say FROM THE BLOOD OF GODS!!! Plus im in charge of a kingdom. How can i say no.
Except that the mass combat system in Heros of battle kind of sucked. Plus it largely relied on more tactical combat, as in "the PC's have to take over this hill to get 20 points while the army is busy doing their thing". It didn't really have alot of REAL mass combat rules, especially rules that didn't involve the PC's on the battlefield (as rulers tend not to be). Don't get me wrong though, the mass combat rules presented in the BR campaign setting were pretty terrible too....I just hope they can make some good rules that allow a semi-quick mass battle of hundreds-thousands of troops that don't rely totally on the PC's actions.
I have in a past game killed and committed bloodtheft against some of the DM's abominations and was crazy enough to attempt to go after the Spider. I think the DM liked to toy with me, but it was a lot of fun.
Noble heroes in BR had bloodlines -- paths of special abilities granted by the land. This would seem to fit in nicely with the talent trees available in 4e.
PC actions made a difference in the world -- not just an adventure.
Besides, my favorite character of all time came from BR.
That said - official support for this setting would be rather nice. I don't think it will happen - BR was always a niche setting, not mainstream. Also, if I remember correctly, it never was a sales success either. The rules for ruling a kingdom and fighting battles are independent of the core rules, so you can still use the old box..
Our group has always taken the view that Cerilia is just another campaign world. We have played a couple campaigns as regents but mostly we enjoy leaving the domain turns as a sidebar or tool for the DM to use and allow the group as players to play as a party just as they would in Greyhawk, Forgotten Realms, Dragon Lance or any other game world.
Even though our group prefers to use a modified 2nd Edition AD&D using Player’s Options combined with a good mix of house rules. We have tried D&D 3.0 & 3.5; it was not to our liking. However, I truely hope 4E returns to the roots of what made Dungeons & Dragons the king of all RPG's.
Just a few thoughts
Aside warning!!!!:
Um, after Birthright, I guess Dark Sun is number two, for being so different and interesting and yet not feeling like it's destroyed all of the fun and mystery of D&D as some of the different settings do (in my opinion, Planescape and Spelljammer tend to do this - you got too much of your Shadowrun in my D&D!). Eberron is maybe number three and Mystara/Hollow World is maybe number four, though that last may be more for Nostalgia than anything else.
I also like Oriental Adventures, but I prefer it to be setting-neutral, and Ravenloft, especially the Masque of the Red Death stuff, always seemed pretty interesting too.
How would you like to see Birthright done in the 4th edition?
To be brutally honest, I only like their Realms & Regency rulesystem ... 4e updated.
It was also written by the same guy who is heading up the development team for 4E. I suppose of any of the worlds left out in 3.0 and 3.5 for official support it is the one most likely to see some sort of resurrection.
The premise was that there was Blood. You were born with some portion of the blood. You gained additional blood by defeating others like you. In a since it was somewhat like Highlander, in the end there can only be one, but with a much more heavily fantasy element.
Elves also were not as friendly as they are in typical DnD.
1) The blood of the gods as a 'power source' for characters; their 'Birthright', literally!
2) A multi-layered 'realms' system that made sense and produced complex and involving power relationships and intrigues.
3) A set of religions that went beyond one-dimensional extensions of a host of gods. Churches with doctrinal issues - rivalries between churches of the same god...
Altogether a fascinating world and some innovative systems to complement it!
First I hated the way cerelian dragons were. I love the chromatic and metalic dragons of generic d&d.
Secondly, there need to be GREAT rules that allow a quick mass battle of hundreds-thousands of troops.
Last but not least, I would love to see a whole lot more blood abilities, as I personally would like to use them with a diffrent pantheon than is included with the normal Birthright setting (I love what Faiths and Avatars did for the Forgotten Realms dieties... it really brought them to life for me)
Last but not least, I would love to see a whole lot more blood abilities, as I personally would like to use them with a diffrent pantheon than is included with the normal Birthright setting (I love what Faiths and Avatars did for the Forgotten Realms dieties... it really brought them to life for me)
What is it that you don't like about the existing deities? I personally think they're fine as is. Moreover, since the deities are tied to the history of the setting, changing them would be a big deal, and would likely do more harm than good.
I'm not familiar with "Faiths and Avatars." (I don't generally play in the Realms.) What did that book do that you liked? Is there anything that could similarly bring the Birthright pantheon to life for you?
I suposee the rules system about Regengy and Domain would be well in the Dungeon Master II. Wouldn´t they?
I hope so. That's all I care about.
Well, it is true that some form of mass-combat system would be desirable even outside the Birthright framework.
Very true, but I would love to see a mass-combat system focused on "reality", something Heroes of Battle, IMHO, isn't. It's just too hard to see why someone would create an army (of low level characters) when a powerful wizard can simply cast Fireball...
I would definitely buy everything about Birthright. It's simply too interesting :D
When I played BR we always ended up playing it like it was Risk with the domain turns and would forget to adventure, though this has more to do with the DM then the setting. Hopefully one of the many DMGs will have rules to ruling a kingdom or running a church or managing a guild that isn't campaign specific. Too much of BR's systems was tied to the Blood strength of the rulers which didn't make sense to me.
Also, their mass battle rules stunk. I like the Heroes of Battle rules for simulating low level PCs on the front lines, but there would have to be a separate system for nobles and generals running the battles.
Derek
Very true, but I would love to see a mass-combat system focused on "reality", something Heroes of Battle, IMHO, isn't. It's just too hard to see why someone would create an army (of low level characters) when a powerful wizard can simply cast Fireball...
Cheap to hire low-level than a high-level wizard risking his life on the battlefield. And if we're talking pre-4e, sooner or later the wizard is going to run out of spells per day.
Birthright is the only campaign world I have played in where a politically driven campaign seemed adventerous, fun, and gave room for all types of classes to enjoy it.
If they do make a 4e Birthright, I hope they include blood powers but don't make them boring. I saw the online 3e update for Birthright and all the fun of 2ed blood powers was sucked out of the 3e adaptation in the name of balance. Randomly rolled powers may not be perfectly balanced, but they are exciting. And at the very least, balanced or not, blood powers should feel awesome not just a minor feat for free.
Birthright is the only campaign world I have played in where a politically driven campaign seemed adventerous, fun, and gave room for all types of classes to enjoy it.
Perhaps, but I like a realm management system where it doesn't focus too much on the "divine rights of king" (a la bloodline powers). I want a Machiavellian-driven system.
Perhaps, but I like a realm management system where it doesn't focus too much on the "divine rights of king" (a la bloodline powers). I want a Machiavellian-driven system.
ok then, here's your solution:
1) remove bloodline powers.
2) let anyone be a wizard
3) call regency 'reputation' or something like that.
ok then, here's your solution:
1) remove bloodline powers.
2) let anyone be a wizard
3) call regency 'reputation' or something like that.
...and presto! You've got a slightly different version of Forgotten Realms! I'm not knockin' the Realms...but they do...ya know...already exist. I like campaign settings that celebrate their differences.
The Realms will always be there when you've got the itch for the Realms campaign, but I wouldn't want them to release a new campaign setting that was just like it with a few cosmetic changes.
That's actually my problem with Ebberron. Its got some differences from the Realms for sure...but it doesn't celebrate them much at all. A dash of new races here, a sprinkle of Dragon Mark feats there and the occasional inclusion of magical technology. But really take a quick glance outside of the city of Sharn, squint just a little and it might as well be the Realms you're lookin at.
Birthright is a campaign world obsessed with politics and lineage and the power of blood...and that's what makes it what it is and gives it flavor. Without that, you might as well run a campaign where all the PCs are nobles from Cormyr (or any other Realms location you like.)
for example, in forgotten realms, it's hard to sneeze without hitting someone higher than level 20. probably a wizard. one with horrifically broken forgotten realms feats, spells, and prestige classes. possibly a chosen of some deity. oh, and don't forget the ridiculously overpowered magic items and even overpowered mundane equipment.
maybe i just haven't looked closely enough at 2e birthright, but i haven't seen it there. and i haven't particularly noticed any signs of horrible brokenness in 3rd edition birthright either, though i don't think i'm able to see the entire thing (i'm not a member on their boards, and that seems to be a requirement afaict).
in any case, the request was a way to make the birthright rules for regency work in a non-birthright setting. the changes i proposed are not setting-specific at all, and could just as easily be used to represent building up your own private kingdom in dark sun, ravenloft, greyhawk, or spelljammer (though certainly a few specific changes would need to be made for each individual setting). you could even homebrew yourself a setting and use the regency rules for that. the changes i suggested were for adapting the rules for running a kingdom/etc to apply towards a generic setting (which, admittedly, forgotten realms does kind of fit into).
certainly i wouldn't recommend you use those suggested changes for a birthright setting itself... within that individual setting, it is important that there be bloodlines and that only people with a bloodline can be full wizards. but if all you want is a basic framework for playing a game based on kingdoms rather than characters, and you want it set somewhere else, then the changes i suggested would work quite well imo. though i haven't actually tested that, mind you.
Birthright is a campaign world obsessed with politics and lineage and the power of blood...and that's what makes it what it is and gives it flavor.
If used metaphorically (the "power of blood" part), it can be ANY campaign world.
ok then, here's your solution:
1) remove bloodline powers.
Doable.
2) let anyone be a wizard
And elves be clerics.
3) call regency 'reputation' or something like that.
Nah, I'll keep the word, "Regency."
Baker wrote the Campaign setting for BR and Eberron.
Derek
Two different Bakers.
Rich created BR (and co-created Alternity)
Keith did Eberron.
I believe that Keith is Rich's nephew, but I have been known to be confused.
The pure politics bas of the setting is what set it apart from all of the others. It wasn't a dungeon crawl. And even if you played it at the adventure level and not the domain one the effects of the domain level had ramifications on the adventurer.
I would love to see some kind of on-going support - but that is not going to happen.
I would hate to see a one-shot deal (like what happend with the Dragon Magazine 3.5 treatment) be done. They are too incomplete and leave so much not covered that they just leave me with a bad feeling in my stomach.
What I find happening with WotC's business model nowadays is an attempt to include "everything" and not make a setting a setting any more.
In Birthright, the setting, there were things that were vastly different than the core rules. Elves did not have deities and couldn't be priests (clerics now), there were no gnomes (although Rich Baker commented that he had planned for a forest based gnome but that the race never was developed enough to appear in the official release). Halflings were from a different place (the Shadow World) and not native to the "real world". In order to cast greater magic (i.e., be a wizard) you had to be of elven blood or be blooded (i.e., have the blood of the fallen goeds running through your veins) - this made wizardly magic much rarer (and subsequently powerful) than in the core rules.
IMO a setting that is a true setting and not just a place to insert everything from the published generic material is a rare find and should be cherished. But I do understand the business model for WotC and the need to ensure financial viability - oh if only I could send them a few hundred gold bars to cover the cost.
The old agreement that they could publish "official" material is going away with 4th ed and will not be reinstated.
WotC is attempting to move everything over to the gleemax sites and IMO this will cause a huge drop off in the on-going preservation of the "old" settings.
This is one part of their business model I just don't really understand.
Two different Bakers.
Rich created BR (and co-created Alternity)
Keith did Eberron.
I believe that Keith is Rich's nephew, but I have been known to be confused.
Whoops, my bad.
Two different Bakers.
Rich created BR (and co-created Alternity)
Keith did Eberron.
I believe that Keith is Rich's nephew, but I have been known to be confused.
Isn't Rich the one who is getting hounded by gaming fans of FR as well as D&D regarding 4e changeover?
Isn't Rich the one who is getting hounded by gaming fans of FR as well as D&D regarding 4e changeover?
Yeah Rich is somewhere up the food chain higher than a mere senior game designer.
I'm not exactly sure what the "structure" is at WotC/D&D but he is fairly high up there and thus has been known to post a tad more freely than others have - thus the feedback on what he has been blogging on 4e.
Yeah Rich is somewhere up the food chain higher than a mere senior game designer.
I'm not exactly sure what the "structure" is at WotC/D&D but he is fairly high up there and thus has been known to post a tad more freely than others have - thus the feedback on what he has been blogging on 4e.
I don't think he's higher than Bill Slavicsek.
Maybe I'll have a "Birthright 4E" campaign where Dwarves and Dragonborn are the same thing, Elves are Eladrin with a sinister air and Tiefling powers, and whether you call that short dude a Gnome or Halfling might have more to do with your culture than his species. Ah, the wheels are already working,
Before anyone screams sacrilege
, my point was really that I like those basic races, was hardly offended by the additional ones, and would certainly swipe and enfold concepts from those 'new' races into the three demihuman species I prefer, if I thought it had usable crunch or fluff. Swiping is good. Eloele is my homegirl.I'm actually not certain how Birthright itself would work with the new system (true magic, lesser magic, blood abilities and all that). I wonder if maybe the best way to approach it would be to Birthright-ize 4E, for an actual Cerilian campaign, rather than convert Birthright to 4E.
It was one of those racial topics that got me thinking this. For example, the stated reason for the split between Elves and Eladrin seems to be that the designers felt Elves had a split cultural personality between the 'master of magic' and 'forest protector' archetypes. Maybe they had this problem in Greyhawk, or the Forgotten Realms, but Sidhelien don't seem to have that identity problem. I'm wondering why they did the split at all, since they have an example of how to make that dichotomy a harmony. And will I be able to 'undo' the split for a BR4E campaign. Any thoughts? Suspicions? Wild and crazy suppositions?
I'm actually not certain how Birthright itself would work with the new system (true magic, lesser magic, blood abilities and all that). I wonder if maybe the best way to approach it would be to Birthright-ize 4E, for an actual Cerilian campaign, rather than convert Birthright to 4E.
Which of the following do you prefer: 1) Re-imagine Cerilia setting, or 2) Tweak the rules to fit the setting?
If you really want to play Birthright, wouldn't it be a good Idea to use 2nd Ed. rules? Seems to be the most simple solution to me.
Why do I want to go backward?
I don't know the setting very well, but there would be several classes and races in 4th Ed. that you either have to ignore completely, or somehow squeeze into gaps that you first have to break into a solified setting. Then there are other classes and races you would have to homebrew and same goes for the monsters and this seems to be quite a lot of work with 4th Ed.
Which of the following do you prefer: 1) Re-imagine Cerilia setting, or 2) Tweak the rules to fit the setting?
I'd go for option 2. For me it's more about conforming system to setting than the other way around. Cerilia doesn't need to be re-imagined as far as I'm concerned.
That said, Birthright has some great ideas that could be applied to any campaign where DM and players would like to add them. Dorothy can leave Kansas and have her bloodtheft too. But I wouldn't consider that so much re-inventing Cerilia as much as imparting some Cerilian underpinnings and flavor to somewhere else.
2e is certainly the system it came out with, and it works great.... not that that ever stopped me from tweaking those rules to fit. (Just my own personal preference, but I never thought True Magic should encompass heavy artillery to quite the degree that any edition of Dungeons and Dragons permits). I always think it's fun to see how settings work in other systems. I'm nerdy like that. If I had the time I probably would have whipped out Birthright: Runequest, Birthright: Harnmaster, Birthright: HARP, and Birthright: Warhammer FRP by now.
I just read that last sentence over and have decided I'm thankful I DON'T have that kind of time. :D
I'd go for option 2. For me it's more about conforming system to setting than the other way around. Cerilia doesn't need to be re-imagined as far as I'm concerned.
And that's how it should be, yet people think the d20 System or SRD-based ruleset is too rigid.
Leaving two other big problems Magic and Elves Can't be Clerics.
Perhaps True Mages can cast realm spells. Or can perform/create magic all day long as heric wizards can in D&D. But magicians are limited to "rituals".
The elves I'd just let be clerics and claim they found religion at the battle of Mt. Deismar
Maybe they have such a non-theistic religion, like the Kalashtar of Eberron. One who worship nature, life, faerie...
Integrating the new races is actually kind of amazingly simple. After the Vos were corrupted by Azrai many of their leaders became the Tiefling race. Vorynn then began to favor the elves promoting a string into the Eladrin race. Basari (the old goddess of the sun) favors the desert lands where the dragonborn have emerged to fight the darkness that continues creeping forward.
Leaving two other big problems Magic and Elves Can't be Clerics.
Perhaps True Mages can cast realm spells. Or can perform/create magic all day long as heric wizards can in D&D. But magicians are limited to "rituals".
The elves I'd just let be clerics and claim they found religion at the battle of Mt. Deismar
I like where you're going with this. I would love to be able to set the first 4E adventures in Cerilia with as little changes as possible. But it's not just the new races in Cerilia, it's also new monsters. For instance, BR never really had orcs, just goblins.
I'm toying with a slight advancement of the timeline for BR where some of the elves' forests were destroyed by goblins forcing more elves to live in human cities. Some small number of elves begin worshiping gods to help in their quest to repair and return to their forests. Of course some elves would join Rhuobhe, swelling the anti-human ranks.
I don't want to make too many changes as then it wouldn't be BR anymore. If WotC ever did come up with something new for BR it would be in 4E terms so some changes are going to happen if new material is ever written. I'm fine with that, as long as they aren't too drastic.
Derek
I think it would be simple to introduce 4e. Only because Cerilia is only 1 continent of the world. It would be very easily to incorporate Orcs coming from across the sea where you would have an Orc Empire or Eladrin, Tiefling/Demon Empire.
As I look ahead of their designer planning... they may do to Forgotten Realms what they've done to Eberron, that is develop every corner (continent) of the world. So it would be good to make the same about BR.
Even if Rich is at the head of designer, (and birthright its baby) I don't believe he would re-developed it since it didn't worked well the first time with TSR. (sadly). But maybe he would more work it as a fan-based setting with insides from the designer.(as monte cook made much of Ptolus). ;)
I do hope that at least Rich Baker will influence to create a stable Paragon-level Kingdom rules sets !!
I do hope that at least Rich Baker will influence to create a stable Paragon-level Kingdom rules sets !!
What do you mean?
Only paragons can rule kingdoms?
That is so un-[smallcaps]Birthright[/smallcaps]-like.
What do you mean?
Only paragons can rule kingdoms?
That is so un-[smallcaps]Birthright[/smallcaps]-like.
I agree. History is replete with incompetent rulers and a very few rulers I would consider of paragon level. Perhaps Julius Ceasar or Henry Plantagenet (possibly their successors as well) and of course Napoleon would be considered 11th level or higher but there weren't many in history.
Derek
The first issue is going to be the new 4E pantheon which (according to Worlds & Monsters) will number 20 plus 1. BR has 7 major ones and a few racial deities like Moradin (except no elven deities obviously). Even if you promote a few awnsheghlien to godhood status, you're still going to be short. In addition, Correllon is the new god of magic.
To compensate for this, I'm going to have Ruornil's clerics proselytize to the Sidhelien (who in my campaign are Eladrin) and promise to bring allies from another dimension to help protect their forests from Human excursions, if they agree to worship him. This allows Ruornil to increase his efforts in fighting back the shadow world and align the Feywild in such a way that creatures from the Feywild can pass into Cerilia. Most of these will be elves (remember the Sidhelien are Eladrin) but a few other creatures like gnomes might come through. The elves also take to worshipping Ruornil who will essentially be Correlon from the PHB.
Of course the elves don't have a history with Humans the way the Sidhelien do so while they agree to help defend the forest from loggers, they don't necessarily participate in the Ghealli Sidhe, which for me would be the Hunt of the Eladrin.
Derek
Note: I've changed my mind on this post. I've instead gone with better ideas later in the thread, but I'm leaving this here as an alternative.
I like where you're going with this. I would love to be able to set the first 4E adventures in Cerilia with as little changes as possible. But it's not just the new races in Cerilia, it's also new monsters. For instance, BR never really had orcs, just goblins.
I'm toying with a slight advancement of the timeline for BR where some of the elves' forests were destroyed by goblins forcing more elves to live in human cities. Some small number of elves begin worshiping gods to help in their quest to repair and return to their forests. Of course some elves would join Rhuobhe, swelling the anti-human ranks.
I don't want to make too many changes as then it wouldn't be BR anymore. If WotC ever did come up with something new for BR it would be in 4E terms so some changes are going to happen if new material is ever written. I'm fine with that, as long as they aren't too drastic.
Derek
Sorry to be chiming in on this rather late in the game but the Dwarves fought against Orogs which were basically steroid induced orcs. Many other monsters could be experiments of the Awnsheighlin or new odd forms of the blood of darkness in the world. Giants were mysterious but definitely mentioned in the books. And the new form of elementals/Archons is just the shifting of the planes as the shadowland rises or falls in power.
Sorry to be chiming in on this rather late in the game but the Dwarves fought against Orogs which were basically steroid induced orcs. Many other monsters could be experiments of the Awnsheighlin or new odd forms of the blood of darkness in the world. Giants were mysterious but definitely mentioned in the books. And the new form of elementals/Archons is just the shifting of the planes as the shadowland rises or falls in power.
Well I was going by the box set which lists appropriate monsters for BR. Orcs weren't on the list but Orogs were. I believe Orogs were a Giantkin in 2E (but I could be wrong). Having said that, retconning orcs into the dwarven lands isn't really that big a deal. Obviously, it's up to the DM to decide what is appropriate for his campaign.
I am planning to run the first 4E modules as set in BR. I was concerned there would be monsters in the adventures that aren't appropriate for BR, but since I'm making some major changes to accommodate 4E that doesn't seem like big deal now.
Derek
I agree. History is replete with incompetent rulers and a very few rulers I would consider of paragon level.
Forget history! I want to play a 1st-level lord PC without having to go through the same standard D&D rules of reaching a "lord" level (9th) or have the prerequisites to pick up Leadership feat (a lord will need an army to conquer and govern/police the realm).
A young king brat could become king if he murder is father after all and could rule with a demonical hand !
I agree with the idea of "expanding" BR but would also like, as said before, that the entire planet be looked upon. Cerilia being only a "part" of the world would make easy fit for the change, and another human kingdom could discover Cerilia and wage a massive war with it or promote new gods etc... bringing the changes needed to conform to 4E. They could bring a new way to magic, leaving the old way since it would be, surely, less restrictive.
I think it you be easy to make an Unofficial 4e BR with major change as a fan constructed setting with votes on major subject/ideas.
I too don't like the idea of a Paragon-level ruler... but was stating this becomes of the idea of the Tier. That the first tier is adventuring in your hometown, Paragon is adventuring in your kingdom and Epic is adventuring in the world. Otherwise I greatly dislike the idea of being a fit level for ruling or a specific class or feat (as per Power of Faerun with the Leadership feat).
A young king brat could become king if he murder is father after all and could rule with a demonical hand !
I do think the awnsheghlien fall into the Paragon tier of play. You rule your kingdom and deal with local politics during Heroic play and when you get too high a level the DM brings in Rhoube or some other big baddy. There could also be lesser awnshegh a DM could create for Heroic rulers. Some, like the Gorgon, would be epic opponents.
Derek
Most of the other issues can be explained fairly easily. Most of the BR gods can be taken from the core deities and given different names. For instance, Pelor, Bahamut, and Correllon can be used for Avani, Haelyn, and Rournil with little to no change. The elven religion (or lack thereof) is a bit problematic since I think there should be elven clerics even if they are rare.
I was reading Greatheart last night, and I stumbled upon the Tallamai. The Tallamai are the elven ancestors revered (but not worshipped) by the Sidhe. They sound an awful lot like the Undying Court of Eberron. I intend to use the Undying Court when 4E Eberron is released for the Sidhe religion in my games.
Races are, as someone pointed out, also easy to explain. TSR never got around to detailing the entire world of Aebrynis so several lands can be used without hurting established canon.
I plan on placing the Tieflings in Aduria as a race of humans twisted by Azrai who fought at the battle at Mount Deismaar. Since then, they haven't had anyone strong enough to unite them and their civilization fell apart forcing them to scatter. They have eventually reached the coasts of Aduria and have begun to show up in small numbers in Mieres and as pirates.
For the Dragonborn, I am tentatively placing them somwhere in the Sea of Dragons. The Dragon Isles seem likely except that they are too far away from Cerilia for a PC race.
Any suggestions?
Derek
And having Tieflings as Vos makes some sense (didn't they cooperate closely with gnolls too?) but having them as Adurians makes a whole lot of sense, and makes them really close to the main setting since there is an Anuirean colony there already.
Dragonborn is a slight problem, but I'd say that they could be from far away, but some traveled to Cerilia with the Khinasi and have since spread across the continent. Or they could be from Aduria too, as another cursed race of Azrai-worshippers, but one that shedded the legacy and rose more rapidly to goodness after Deismaar (and later shredded the tiefling empire, just like in that backstory ;)
Eladrin and Elves could depend upon how "urbane" that particular elf was. The elven forests were always described as portals into the feywild anyway.
And do elves really need clerics when they can have Warlords as leaders? Anyway, time to call it a night. (At least I've subscribed to this thread now, so you might see more of me later ;))
Back in the days I used orc stats just as yet another variety of goblins, but I have to agree that making them orog servitors would make more sense.
And having Tieflings as Vos makes some sense (didn't they cooperate closely with gnolls too?) but having them as Adurians makes a whole lot of sense, and makes them really close to the main setting since there is an Anuirean colony there already.
Dragonborn is a slight problem, but I'd say that they could be from far away, but some traveled to Cerilia with the Khinasi and have since spread across the continent. Or they could be from Aduria too, as another cursed race of Azrai-worshippers, but one that shedded the legacy and rose more rapidly to goodness after Deismaar (and later shredded the tiefling empire, just like in that backstory ;)
Eladrin and Elves could depend upon how "urbane" that particular elf was. The elven forests were always described as portals into the feywild anyway.
And do elves really need clerics when they can have Warlords as leaders? Anyway, time to call it a night. (At least I've subscribed to this thread now, so you might see more of me later ;))
You know you're right about the elven forests. They were described as full of fey and other dangers so it sounds like they could have hidden portals to the Feywild that most humans don't know about. You can say certain elven kingdoms are really Eladrin although which ones is the question. Should Tuarhievel be Eladrin and Sielwode Elven or vice versa?
Derek
(But if that answer does not suffice, I could always start reading up on things again and form an opinion that is not merely out of memory ;))
Being lazy I would state that either both forests hold Eladrin and elves are those living outside of the elven kingdoms (in the scattered remains of the old elven forests that once covered Anuire), or I would say that all are elves except those living in the hidden parts of the forests, or even in the actual feywild.
(But if that answer does not suffice, I could always start reading up on things again and form an opinion that is not merely out of memory ;))
That's a pretty good line to draw in regards to the Sidhe. Say after Deismaar, the Sidhe split into three groups. Some embraced their human comrades and left to live among them. These are 4E Elves. Some stayed with Azrai and became dark elves. These are 4E Drow but without the dark skin. Most went back to their forests and tried to keep out the humanoids and the other races. These are 4E Eladrin.
Example Drow - Rhoubhe the Manslayer
Example Elf - Braedonnal Tuare, General of Tuornen's armies
Example Eladrin - Fhileraene of Tuarhievel
Derek
Soo.. were there any other questions, or are we back to waiting for release day?
I assume the blood powers would be subset 4E powers (i.e. at will, per encounter, and per day abilities) but how would you choose them? I was thinking that being a blood regent required a feat and then you could substitute a class power for a blood power when you get access to them normally. What blood powers you could select depended on what bloodline you descended from obviously.
Any thoughts?
Derek
The only thing left is to come up with a fourth edition way of doing blood powers. I like that the Birthright.net way was balanced with the other non-blooded characters. This way you didn't have to worry about the 25% xp bonus to non-blooded characters.
I assume the blood powers would be subset 4E powers (i.e. at will, per encounter, and per day abilities) but how would you choose them? I was thinking that being a blood regent required a feat and then you could substitute a class power for a blood power when you get access to them normally. What blood powers you could select depended on what bloodline you descended from obviously.
Any thoughts?
Derek
Bloodline talents and bloodline trees.
Bloodline talents and bloodline trees.
From what I understand, the class powers are the D&D equivalent of talent trees. So I agree with you. I also think some powers could be upgraded later as well.
Derek
Disadvantage: Low-level characters can't have the most amazing abilities.
Advantage: Blooded characters are completely balanced with the others.
Derek
From what I understand, the class powers are the D&D equivalent of talent trees. So I agree with you. I also think some powers could be upgraded later as well.
Yeah, I seem to notice in the preview of character sheets for 4e, they are using the term "powers" instead of talents.
Then again "powers" could be a more general term that would embody both talents, class features, and feats.
So what happens when a non-blooded character bloodthefts a blooded character? I say in that case, the non-blooded character gets the birthright feat for free as treasure. I also think that the number of blood powers you can select should be limited by the strength of the bloodline or by character's tier (i.e. Heroic, Paragon, Epic) or both.
Derek
traditionally, non-blooded characters killing a blooded character means that the blooded character's chosen heir (usually) gets the bloodline.
if you want to become blooded when you are not blooded, you have to get it by being said heir, most of the time at least (there are exceptions however)
As for number of abilities, I wouldn't limit them by tier - level alone will do that nicely, in my opinion.
Also, another thought I got recently was to wonder if one should wait for Eberron and see how they handle dragonmarks, since there are some similarities between Dragonmarks and Birthrights.
From what I recalled, bloodtheft were for those blooded (much like only immortal people could benefit from decapitating immortal people in the Highlander movie)
That's true except in the case of a non-blooded character killing an Awnsheghlin. Of course that might have just as many negative consequences as positive ones.
As for number of abilities, I wouldn't limit them by tier - level alone will do that nicely, in my opinion.
How about you can't upgrade your bloodline strength (say from minor to major) until you get to paragon level. That would probably be better. Since you'll only get approximately 5 blood powers max (and that's if you only pick blood powers and not any class powers), you'll also want to have upgraded versions of those powers in the paragon tier.
Also, another thought I got recently was to wonder if one should wait for Eberron and see how they handle dragonmarks, since there are some similarities between Dragonmarks and Birthrights.
I'm definitely going to wait on my 4E campaign till at least the PHB2 comes out with druids. I wouldn't be surprised if the 4E ECS is published soon after.
Derek
Anyway, back to rehashing what I wrote a while ago but you never got to see:
Sure, if someone gets blooded somehow (investiture is another way that comes to mind) they get the "blooded" feat for free at once, and pay for it as soon as possible. (Advantage, they get a feat earlier than they should - Disadvantage, their next feat choice is locked up)
Since I like simplicity I would let players have a bloodline strength matching their tier straight away. Heroes would always be of a Minor bloodline, improved to a Major one at Paragon tier and finally becoming Greater at Epic tier. (NPCs would of course be able to be of any bloodline strength at any level - that's because they are NPCs ;))
As for powers, I think one might be able to get fifteen of them on a thirty-level span, but I agree that about five is a better limit. I'd also like Bloodlines to be slightly more unique, so I would actually split the abilities that exist into separate Bloodlines with little or no overlap, allowing 4-6 unique abilities per Bloodline. (Which would improve by level if needed, and some might be limited to higher tiers to begin with)
-
ECS might come out before PHB2, or after, but I don't think one has to wait for PHB2. Druids (and Barbarians) are for Reynir and Vos. Nature-worship among the Anuire is the work of ordinary clerics. Bards (also in PHB2, probably) can be seen as a Brechtür class, and Sorcerers could be the Khinasi mages (to make their magic strange and different). So yes, for a full BR world we'd need to wait, but starting out in Anuire should be quite possible from the get-go of 4ed, no ;)
I thought I would just throw my two cents in here. Birthright is what brought me into playing 2e D&D, and it was in my opinion the best setting that has ever been produced for D&D.
I personally think it had trouble being accepted because of the non-traditional stuff (battle cards, regency turns, etc), but was a great setting anyway. WotC's total disinterest in the setting was one of the biggest mistakes as far as I am concerned.
One of my first thoughts about 4e was whether or not I could easily adapt Birthright to it, and that still rattles around in my thoughts as a possibility.
I both played and then DMed our Birthright campaign (after the original DM left), and have fond memories of it. GREAT setting.
KAM
(Now why do I feel I recognize your name.. hmm)
Yes, Birthright was difficult and strange, but fun, and if you count the regency manuals it got a lot of support in a short time ;)
Greetings,
I thought I would just throw my two cents in here. Birthright is what brought me into playing 2e D&D, and it was in my opinion the best setting that has ever been produced for D&D.
I personally think it had trouble being accepted because of the non-traditional stuff (battle cards, regency turns, etc), but was a great setting anyway. WotC's total disinterest in the setting was one of the biggest mistakes as far as I am concerned.
One of my first thoughts about 4e was whether or not I could easily adapt Birthright to it, and that still rattles around in my thoughts as a possibility.
I both played and then DMed our Birthright campaign (after the original DM left), and have fond memories of it. GREAT setting.
KAM
I take all the credit to myself!
Hello and welcome :D
(Now why do I feel I recognize your name.. hmm)
Yes, Birthright was difficult and strange, but fun, and if you count the regency manuals it got a lot of support in a short time ;)
My Name? I couldn't guess.
Birthright did have quite a few books over its short life under 2e, but as we all know--got ZERO love in 3/3.5.
I take all the credit to myself!
Yes.
KAM
My Name? I couldn't guess.
Birthright did have quite a few books over its short life under 2e,
From what I hear, it was a two-year pet project.
but as we all know--got ZERO love in 3/3.5.
Only if you don't count the "Campaign Classics" issues from Dragon magazine.
Can't be helped. WotC didn't want to get in the same mistake as TSR, one of many mitigating factors that led to the company's financial downfall, making too many settings for too little audiences.
But if WotC holds true to the most recent promise of releasing "one setting a year," who knows? Cerilia may come back. It may not be one of those major long-running lines like Forgotten Realms or their new contest-winner setting Eberron, but at least we could get one book.
From what I hear, it was a two-year pet project.
Only if you don't count the "Campaign Classics" issues from Dragon magazine.
Can't be helped. WotC didn't want to get in the same mistake as TSR, one of many mitigating factors that led to the company's financial downfall, making too many settings for too little audiences.
But if WotC holds true to the most recent promise of releasing "one setting a year," who knows? Cerilia may come back. It may not be one of those major long-running lines like Forgotten Realms or their new contest-winner setting Eberron, but at least we could get one book.
Well, I think people often buy what is put in front of them. They've put a lot of effort into Forgotten Realms, and more recently Eberron. I'd love one Book similar to the FR Campaign Book from 3e.
KAM
Well, I think people often buy what is put in front of them. They've put a lot of effort into Forgotten Realms, and more recently Eberron.
Then I'm not one of the people you're referring to. True, I buy FR ... not blindly as I'm still missing some of their 3e [physical, non-electronic] products in my collection, including the elusive Races of Faerun ... but I don't blindly buy Eberron.
In fact, I'm not even remotely interested in Eberron. So why should I buy it if it is in front of me?
Unfortunately, the designers whether by purposeful intent, subconscious accident, or sheer coincidence brought over many aspects of Birthright into either the Forgotten Realms or the 4E Core pseudo-setting. Hopefully, if Birthright ever does get a 4E update, it can remain distinct.
What elements do you think have been brought into those other settings?
KAM
Then I'm not one of the people you're referring to. True, I buy FR ... not blindly as I'm still missing some of their 3e [physical, non-electronic] products in my collection, including the elusive Races of Faerun ... but I don't blindly buy Eberron.
In fact, I'm not even remotely interested in Eberron. So why should I buy it if it is in front of me?
Well, not everyone does that. My point is--there is no choice to buy Birthright or FR--Birthright doesn't exist as a product line.
If they say "Well, FR sold better than Birthright" I would ask...why is that? Is it inherently a better setting or did you put more effort into it? Were the supporting Novels marketed equally? Did it have the same advertising budget?
I guess it doesn't matter--Birthright was tossed aside for whatever reason and ignored completely (with the very brief Dragon article) in 3/3.5, so it seems doubtful they will come back to it--Unfortunately.
KAM
KAM
I guess it doesn't matter--Birthright was tossed aside for whatever reason and ignored completely (with the very brief Dragon article) in 3/3.5, so it seems doubtful they will come back to it--Unfortunately.
But WotC's representatives did promised to release "one setting per year."
Granted, it didn't mention long-term support for all of them (in terms of releasing setting-related supplements), but if possible they could give BR the full-fledged 4e campaign setting book treatment it deserves, if that is to be the lone product.
But WotC's representatives did promised to release "one setting per year."
Granted, it didn't mention long-term support for all of them (in terms of releasing setting-related supplements), but if possible they could give BR the full-fledged 4e campaign setting book treatment it deserves, if that is to be the lone product.
I have almost understood it to mean that there will be no continued support, although I suppose that core books that vastly outsell the others will get some splat or more setting books added to it since that would seem like plain business sense.
However, even with "one setting per year" we must compete with Eberron (a fairly given second), Greyhawk, Dragonlance, Planescape, Dark Sun and Mystara. We should be able to nudge in ahead of Red Steel, at least ;)
Of course, if WotC will move on to the follow the rest of the RPG industry with new editions every five years instead of the fairly languid pace they have had so far, then we might miss out, unless we can somehow manage to get ahead in the queue.
But WotC's representatives did promised to release "one setting per year."
Granted, it didn't mention long-term support for all of them (in terms of releasing setting-related supplements), but if possible they could give BR the full-fledged 4e campaign setting book treatment it deserves, if that is to be the lone product.
I'd vote for Birthright, and honestly--I am not sure I would need all that much support for it. If the mechanical changes are done well, and the overall setting is described, I can manage with that. If they wanted to update it in small ways, they could do that with their online stuff (assuming that survives).
KAM
I'd vote for Birthright, and honestly--I am not sure I would need all that much support for it. If the mechanical changes are done well, and the overall setting is described, I can manage with that. If they wanted to update it in small ways, they could do that with their online stuff (assuming that survives).
I just want the Realms & Regency system, so I can plug it into ANY campaign setting.
I just want the Realms & Regency system, so I can plug it into ANY campaign setting.
That't the part I am less interested, but they could certainly produce rules for that for use in any setting. I doubt it is high on their list however.
KAM
What elements do you think have been brought into those other settings?
KAM
At the start of 3e, rumors floated around that the Shadow Weave concept (or something very close to it) originated for Birthright shortly before they canceled the line. Pieces of that design work inspired the Shadow Weave that appeared in FR 3e. Then lately things seem to continually click into place. I've never been exposed to Birthright too much myself (I remember playing a demo of an old PC turn based strategy game based on the setting), so I don't know how much of this actually fits.
You know, you guys should head over to the Free Download area and checkout the Birthright Setting stuff - it'll give you a VERY good idea what 4e FR will be like.
Giants are more 'Elemental' in Cerilia.
Fomorians are clever, powerful creatures.
SHADOW is huge there...
They got Shades...
And if you Download the Beastiary (Blood Spwan), take ESPECIAL NOTE of the sidebar that describes how the world of Abyrnis was once whole, and how it was seperated into two worlds.
Originally Posted by From Blood Spawn
When Two Worlds were One...
The sages say that long ago, perhaps before humanity existed on Aebrynis, the world of Daylight and the world of Shadow were as one. The landscape of Aebrynis had not completely formed then, and the world could change according to its own rules, without rhyme or reason. A lake might form where a mountain had been, white glaciers moved over deserts, and rivers flowed through the sky. This was a time before the gods, but it ultimately resulted in their creation...
This is what happens when someone creates something cr@ppy, and no one buys it, and then later they are given the power over it's greatest rival.
Someone definately has an agenda.....
Rich Baker, WotC Senior Designer, had this to say in response.
I'm sure I'll regret being drawn into this, but this deserves response.
1. Giants: A 4e decision I had nothing to do with. That was the work of James, Andy, Rob, Chris, and Bill. I think it's the right call, but I didn't make it.
2. Fomorians: We're bringing them back toward their roots in Irish mythology. The resemblance to anything we said about them in Birthright is coincidental. In all honesty, I don't even *remember* what we said about fomorians in Birthright. It didn't inform our concepting this time around.
3. Our Shadowfell in the new D&D core cosmology is basically the 3e Plane of Shadow. It has little to do with the Shadow World of Birthright.
4. If you're accusing me of setting out to destroy the Realms out of jealousy because it's done better than "my" world of Cerilia, or trying to stamp Cerilia into the Realms because I'm desperate to salvage 15-year-old ideas, you simply have no idea what you're talking about. Neither of those are remotely true. Enough said.
If anything, it shows the staff at WotC favors a certain style fairly consistently over time. I wouldn't say it's bad, just a little quirk of the designers, it could be good even if they leverage their likes well.
The main thing that no setting has come close to Birthright is the nation-level scale of it. That would be interesting as it's own game. Like a PnP version of Heroes of Might and Magic
That't the part I am less interested, but they could certainly produce rules for that for use in any setting. I doubt it is high on their list however.
Why not? It's the one thing that makes it unique from the other campaign settings TSR/WotC published, that caught my eyes. I consider it the product's selling points, as much as flying ships in space is to Spelljammer.
At the start of 3e, rumors floated around that the Shadow Weave concept (or something very close to it) originated for Birthright shortly before they canceled the line. Pieces of that design work inspired the Shadow Weave that appeared in FR 3e. Then lately things seem to continually click into place. I've never been exposed to Birthright too much myself (I remember playing a demo of an old PC turn based strategy game based on the setting), so I don't know how much of this actually fits.
If anything, it shows the staff at WotC favors a certain style fairly consistently over time. I wouldn't say it's bad, just a little quirk of the designers, it could be good even if they leverage their likes well.
The main thing that no setting has come close to Birthright is the nation-level scale of it. That would be interesting as it's own game. Like a PnP version of Heroes of Might and Magic
I WISH that there was a plan to kill off FR in favor of Birthright. I totally disagree with Rich Baker, because I think "His" Birthright was FAR better than anything I've ever seen in Forgotten Realms which has always struck me as cartoony. Those 15 Year old ideas are the best thing to come out of TSR/WotC as far as Campaigns are concerned--my opinion. I do however, LOVE the races from Eberron, and generally like the flavor of that setting.
KAM
Why not? It's the one thing that makes it unique from the other campaign settings TSR/WotC published, that caught my eyes. I consider it the product's selling points, as much as flying ships in space is to Spelljammer.
I would be behind them producing that--it just wasn't my primary interest, and I am guessing that had a more narrow appeal than basic adventure type of stuff.
KAM
I WISH that there was a plan to kill off FR in favor of Birthright. I totally disagree with Rich Baker, because I think "His" Birthright was FAR better than anything I've ever seen in Forgotten Realms which has always struck me as cartoony. Those 15 Year old ideas are the best thing to come out of TSR/WotC as far as Campaigns are concerned--my opinion. I do however, LOVE the races from Eberron, and generally like the flavor of that setting.
KAM
Though I disagree with you about the Realms, you might have gotten your wish in part with the 4E Realms. You might want to glance over the 4E version. While I'm pretty sure 4E FR will not come close enough to Birthright for you, it seems the designers (probably subconsciously) did loosely incorporate a few ideas here and there at the same time they killed off the old Realms. For the time being, this is as close to that wish as WotC is willing to grant.
seems every time they detail a world, they go from low-powered (ie characters of level 1 are already rare, level 10+ is extremely rare) to stupidly high-powered (ie you can't spit without hitting half a dozen epic level NPCs with the spray, unless you make the epic DC to avoid hitting them).
seriously, if they removed FR as the main setting and switched in Birthright (or any other CS, for that matter) i bet it wouldn't take more than a few months for a new magewhoistotallynotanelminsterclone would show up out of nowhere, followed shortly thereafter by the rest of birthright pretty much turning into the realms. i wouldn't want Birthright (or any of the settings i really truly like) to become the main setting because then they become the main dumping grounds for all kinds of garbage that don't fit the setting.
on the other hand, getting a rules update wouldn't be unpleasant at all, and there's already a ton of fleshing out done in the BR setting (as far as i can tell, pretty much every domain has it's own book?), but beyond that i'm not sure i would want to hear anything more on BR. well, maybe new realm magic, war magic spells, etc. but as far as developing the setting? i dunno about that...
seriously, if they removed FR as the main setting and switched in Birthright (or any other CS, for that matter) i bet it wouldn't take more than a few months for a new magewhoistotallynotanelminsterclone would show up out of nowhere
High Mage Aelies? ;)
I WISH that there was a plan to kill off FR in favor of Birthright.
I hope not. Up until now, I support the revival of Cerilia. But if it must come at the expense of removing my favorite setting: HELL NO!!!
So, I strongly recommend you rethink your statement above or you'll find an angry man opposing BR for 4e or any future editions.
I hope not. Up until now, I support the revival of Cerilia. But if it must come at the expense of removing my favorite setting: HELL NO!!!
So, I strongly recommend you rethink your statement above or you'll find an angry man opposing BR for 4e or any future editions.
Well, honestly--I don't care of FR exists or not, but given the choice I would choose Birthright every time.
FR is their precious baby--even if they just gave him a spanking.
KAM
not sure i'd want wizards to do birthright to the same level as FR.
seems every time they detail a world, they go from low-powered (ie characters of level 1 are already rare, level 10+ is extremely rare) to stupidly high-powered (ie you can't spit without hitting half a dozen epic level NPCs with the spray, unless you make the epic DC to avoid hitting them).
seriously, if they removed FR as the main setting and switched in Birthright (or any other CS, for that matter) i bet it wouldn't take more than a few months for a new magewhoistotallynotanelminsterclone would show up out of nowhere, followed shortly thereafter by the rest of birthright pretty much turning into the realms. i wouldn't want Birthright (or any of the settings i really truly like) to become the main setting because then they become the main dumping grounds for all kinds of garbage that don't fit the setting.
on the other hand, getting a rules update wouldn't be unpleasant at all, and there's already a ton of fleshing out done in the BR setting (as far as i can tell, pretty much every domain has it's own book?), but beyond that i'm not sure i would want to hear anything more on BR. well, maybe new realm magic, war magic spells, etc. but as far as developing the setting? i dunno about that...
Well, I would be happy with a single book which Sets up the campaign. I can take it from there. Honestly, I don't have much interest in what Super-powerful characters are doing to overshadow my players. FR is and always has been someone else's game--and no matter what I do, can never be the players game.
KAM
Though I disagree with you about the Realms, you might have gotten your wish in part with the 4E Realms. You might want to glance over the 4E version. While I'm pretty sure 4E FR will not come close enough to Birthright for you, it seems the designers (probably subconsciously) did loosely incorporate a few ideas here and there at the same time they killed off the old Realms. For the time being, this is as close to that wish as WotC is willing to grant.
I fully admit to having a prejudice against FR, but understand others love it.
FR will never be able to replace Birthright for me, even if they do incorporate some of the elements of it, but I will look at it.
KAM
I fully admit to having a prejudice against FR, but understand others love it.
Just as I understand you love BR.
You better not have a problem with me liking both BR and FR, despite your very public dislike.
Just as I understand you love BR.
You better not have a problem with me liking both BR and FR, despite your very public dislike.
Most of the people I play with like (or in some cases, love) Forgotten Realms. I don't have any need for people to give up what they like just because I don't.
Enjoy!
KAM
i had breifly considered using the a patchwork system using varios rules in the dmg2 but quite around the anoncment of 4e as a dm the setting is easy enough the problem lies with the nuts and bolts of regency (as well as remaking some of the iconic monsters) plus the setting main flaw in that its not dm freindly no offence too loyal birthright fans but it takes a fair amount of dm skill too make it work they wont rerelease it until they solve this problem
BR can be difficult due to the intense political encounters. I would think Skill Challenges would help make things easier now. Also, managing all those competing agendas from PCs and NPCs can be very difficult. I'm hoping a future 4E DMG X will provide rules and advice on how to run adventures for hero-kings and queens.
Derek