Pathfinder Roleplaying Game: Ultimate Campaign (OGL)

- Has anyone generated hex maps that scale any parts of Varisia to a kingmaker-size/kingdom-building format?

There is a poster, hewhocaves, at The Piazza who is using the mapping tools another poster, Thorfinn Tait created for mapping in the Mystara/Known World style, to map out Golarion. Hewhocaves is currently working on the Kingmaker region at a 12 mi/hex scale, and I'm not sure what his current progress is beyond that.

If you are interested in a more robust system for integrating population with your kingdom-building rules... stay tuned!

Imma just leave this right here.

Jason Nelson wrote:

If you are interested in a more robust system for integrating population with your kingdom-building rules... stay tuned!

Imma just leave this right here.

Nice

I'm a bit confused about teams. Do they have no maintainance costs?

Supposed I have a team of Soldiers which I send out every day to patrol the local area, thereby creating Influence for me. Because they are greatful I am keeping them safe from bandits.
But what does that cost me? These guys need wages and all I paid for was the recruitment cost. And I'm quite sure that unlike managers, I don't have to pay the recruitment cost daily, because 220 gp is a lot of coin. And it would be about ten times as much per man as the Lieutenant manager gets, so this can be ruled out.

Jason Nelson wrote:

If you are interested in a more robust system for integrating population with your kingdom-building rules... stay tuned!

Imma just leave this right here.

Now that's just cool. Another instant buy, it seems. :-)

Jason Nelson wrote:

If you are interested in a more robust system for integrating population with your kingdom-building rules... stay tuned!

Imma just leave this right here.

Needs product page!

I'm a bit confused about teams. Do they have no maintainance costs?

Supposed I have a team of Soldiers which I send out every day to patrol the local area, thereby creating Influence for me. Because they are greatful I am keeping them safe from bandits.
But what does that cost me? These guys need wages and all I paid for was the recruitment cost. And I'm quite sure that unlike managers, I don't have to pay the recruitment cost daily, because 220 gp is a lot of coin. And it would be about ten times as much per man as the Lieutenant manager gets, so this can be ruled out.

Your investment in the team is the cost, and you only pay that once.

But remember that if you lose contact with your teams, they may leave you (Upkeep step 3).

Remember also that the downtime system is about settlements. Your example Soldiers are probably off-duty members of the town guard or retired military who have day or night jobs doing something else, which is why you don't have to pay them every week (your initial investment in capital is to recruit them to your cause), as they have food and lodging covered. But if you want those Soldiers to patrol a fort that's two days' journey from the nearest settlement, you have to start paying them like hirelings. When you recruit people into an organization, they're there because they like or respect you (or the prestige and possible wealth they expect to get from associating with you), but they're not followers (a la Leadership) and there are stricter limits to what they'll do without pay.

I've heard a few people say the paper quality of this book isn't as good as previous books. A friend said the paper is matte as opposed to the usual glossy stuff. Can anyone else confirm?

Gauss wrote:

4) In the Leadership Role Skills on page 232 there is an Ambassador role listed. No such role is listed in the Leadership Roles on pages 200-204. Could you clarify the discrepancy?

Ambassador got renamed to Grand Diplomat (which was what it was called in the original KM rules anyway; I thought Ambassador sounded cooler, but they changed it back, probably for reasons of consistency with the earlier rules).

Odd, they left Grand Diplomat in that list as well. Thanks for answering the questions. :)

- Gauss

I finally received my book today, haven't had time to peruse it in detail yet, but I will soon.

However, I did notice the pages are different in texture compared to prior hardcovers. And I mean they actually seem a bit rough and don't have the same glossy sheen/feeling. Has anyone else noticed this with their copy?

Was that intentional? If so, why was it changed? Maybe because it's just different and I haven't adjusted to it yet, but I prefer the more glossy pages.

Heard it from many people, seems to be normal. No idea why, though.

I've heard a few people say the paper quality of this book isn't as good as previous books. A friend said the paper is matte as opposed to the usual glossy stuff. Can anyone else confirm?

I don't know whether it technically counts as better or worse quality, but yes, the paper is definitely different. I was surprised by it.

In my opinion, it does make the big chapter-title artwork pages look worse, as though the ink is a little faded. Overall, I'd say that I prefer the glossy-style paper. This stuff isn't really something I'd normally complain about, but it was very unexpected for my third purchase from the RPG line to have very different paper from my other two (CRB and Ultimate Equipment). The inconsistency is what bothers me.

Love the book. My only complaint is that there _still_ is no product that includes a design/build traps crunchy bits. I was hoping it would have been in here.

Jason Nelson wrote:

Jason Nelson wrote:

If you are interested in a more robust system for integrating population with your kingdom-building rules... stay tuned!

Imma just leave this right here.

Needs product page!

It'll get an official product page once it goes live on Paizo.com, which I would estimate as probably next Friday.

Until then, you can point your discussions here!

Clearly the 55 years for Elven Children is stupid and always has been.

Have fun creating a group of PC Children, with an Elf and a Human. 10 years later the human is an adult at 18, but the elf will need 45 years more...Stupid.

I never understood the logic behind it...You can be a long lived race and mature as fast as any normal race.

Why would you need a hundred years to be able to do what human can do in 18 years?

As far as I am concerned, every humanoid race reach adulthood and maturity as fast as human, some of them just have a way longer lifespan.

It is especially ultra dumb for race like the Aasimar, according to the rules, an Aasimar reach adulthood around 60 years old, yet most Aasimar are born from human parents and grow in human culture.

So what makes those kids growind up so slowly? Do they stay at pre-school for 10 years?

The funny thing, is that even Paizo does not respect their own rules, in Rise of the Runelords Nualia is an Aasimar, born among humans and is perfectly adult and kicking ass at around 20 years old.

That's rather simple, although long to explain. Bear with me, if you will.

Complex organisms take longer to mature. That wouldn't make it longer alone, but then it becomes the choice between fast maturing x longer life spawn. You mature fast as a human - reproductive age in you early teens - at the cost of a reduced life spawn. You die at 80~90 (and that is more than the average) mostly because your body wasn't made to last, it was made to mature as fast as possible for you to reproduce quickly and keep you species alive, something quite necessary when you don't have the abundance of resources that civilization brings you, proper protection against the weather or predators.

Elves, on the other hand, seem to be pretty much created "by the gods" having magic and civilization as a given. That means they don't have to mature quickly, they can take their time to have a organism that is focused on lasting a looong time. So it kinda makes sense that they take so long to become adults. After all, they are made to last around 550 years or so. Wait, isn't that too little?

The problem is not so much how long they take to mature, but their maximum age expectancy. If you exclude them, the longer-lived is the race, the more time they take to reach middle age/old/venerable, proportionally. A dwarf is an adult at 40, but reaches middle age at 125, 3.125 times the adulthood age. Humans are 15/35, 2.3 times; half-elves 20/62, 3.1; Halflings 20/50, 2.5; while an orc (advanced races has this, pages 248-249) is 12/20, only 1.6 times. Elves on the other hand violate this completely, being 110/175, 1.6 times just like orcs!

This is actually a problem with all the "extreme"-long living races, the time they take to mature compared with how fast they age is completely nonsense. If you took dwarves as a base, elves should be at least 4x, reaching middle age at 440, not 175. Keeping in mind the dwarven coefficients of x3.125/4.7/6.75, +2d100 of max age, and upping them somewhat to compensate for greater maturing times for elves, you would have something like x4/6/8 +6d00, or 110/440/660/880 886~1480 for adulthood/middle age/old age/venerable and maximum age. All core* races have that old age is aprox. 1.5 times middle age, and venerable is 1.3 times old age, so that's where I took the numbers from.

*Actually, the only ones that disrespect this rule blatantly are the Assimar/tiefling, Oread/Ifrit/Sylph/Undine and Samsaran, races of planar origin and the reincarnation ones.
And even those exceptions follow the "the most you live, the greater the proportion between adulthood and old age" - middle age is 2.5 adulthood, for them. Only elves (and the ones with the same age breakpoints, dhampir and drow) break this tendency.

In conclusion: Taking long to mature is not the problem with elves, aging to fast (proportionally) is!

Well, the issue I take umbrage with most probably will not get clarified or given context any further, so I will let it lie for now and just keep with my houserules in my campaign. My own GM's reaction in the RotRL campaign I am playing in can be summed up with "Nuts!" and he'll keep the rules as they are by RAW.

That being said, I have one further question: In the magic item creation section, there is one sentence which puts a RAW-interpretation based decision of my RotRL GM in question. The sentence is as follows:

"If he has fewer than 8 days before the next adventure, he’ll need to finish his crafting while traveling or use accelerated crafting in town to speed up the process."

My RotRL GM has so far interpreted the accelerated crafting rule in the way that you still can't craft more than 1000 GP per day, but can do so in half the time per day, i.e. 4 hours.

This sentence seems to imply that accelerated crafting functions instead in the way in which I always have interpreted it in my campaigns, meaning you can double your crafting output to 2000 GP per day by crafting a full 8 hour day with accelerated speed.

Given how my own Wizard in the RotRL campaign has CWI, I'd really appreciate a clarification. :)

Your investment in the team is the cost, and you only pay that once.

Thanks for the clarification, I was wondering the same thing. Thought I missed something somewhere. BTW, spent all day at work reading this, probably the most focused I have ever been reading a new book. I likes it.

I've heard a few people say the paper quality of this book isn't as good as previous books. A friend said the paper is matte as opposed to the usual glossy stuff. Can anyone else confirm?

It's definitely different. I much prefer the new style personally (but I've never liked glossy paper for inside books).

Another couple of clarification questions...

1. On the army sheet it lists MAX. ARMIES on the same line as the General. Does the General's stats/level decide the number of armies? Or does something else?

2. Are there prerequisites for having an army made up of a specific class (i.e. Paladins, Monks, Wizards) and what decides the max size of these types of armies?

3. What is the max level of troop a kingdom can create?

4. How long does it take to form an army?

Thank you!

(Also Jason, I'm going to be buying your book tomorrow...I love this kingdom building stuff and I can't get enough. Plus, your work is always amazing :)

Evil Genius Prime wrote:

I've heard a few people say the paper quality of this book isn't as good as previous books. A friend said the paper is matte as opposed to the usual glossy stuff. Can anyone else confirm?

It's definitely different. I much prefer the new style personally (but I've never liked glossy paper for inside books).

I prefer the matte as well. It makes it an easier read imo.

Just got mine in from Amazon, and my god is this book gorgeous.

I love the art littered throughout it, so many great pieces. Best one is Lem trying to court the elven girl (to her shock) and her male elven friend laughing his ass off.

You can't tell from that picture, but he was actually a Chelaxian slave-trader - so it only serves him right that I got the last laugh.

If I use the downtime rules to found a Bardic College (p107), Magical Academy (p111), Monastery (p111) or similar organisation that is also described in Inner sea Magic (chapter 3)would I or my party gain access to the benefits of fame described in the that book (such as infirmary access or professors assistant) and how might that interact with the more general fame rules from Ultimate Campaign? How would one gain fame in the organisation as it doesn't make much sense for you to join your own organisation in obscurity and work your way up (especially if you already have a high general fame score)!

Maybe I've missed it, but did anyone else get the idea of making Goods and Magic some kind of treasure, and Influence and Labor a quest reward?
I think in Kingmaker you can get Build Points from stuff you are finding on your adventures. If you would raid a bandit camp, you could get some Goods and Magic from the bandits loot, and might also get some Influence and Labor from the grateful locals.

Well, the issue I take umbrage with most probably will not get clarified or given context any further, so I will let it lie for now and just keep with my houserules in my campaign. My own GM's reaction in the RotRL campaign I am playing in can be summed up with "Nuts!" and he'll keep the rules as they are by RAW.

That being said, I have one further question: In the magic item creation section, there is one sentence which puts a RAW-interpretation based decision of my RotRL GM in question. The sentence is as follows:

"If he has fewer than 8 days before the next adventure, he’ll need to finish his crafting while traveling or use accelerated crafting in town to speed up the process."

My RotRL GM has so far interpreted the accelerated crafting rule in the way that you still can't craft more than 1000 GP per day, but can do so in half the time per day, i.e. 4 hours.

This sentence seems to imply that accelerated crafting functions instead in the way in which I always have interpreted it in my campaigns, meaning you can double your crafting output to 2000 GP per day by crafting a full 8 hour day with accelerated speed.

Given how my own Wizard in the RotRL campaign has CWI, I'd really appreciate a clarification. :)

Being a heavy duty crafter in my own campaign I had to go back and get a very specific read on the crafting limitations. They specifically mention the HOURLY limit of 8 hours per day, and not a GP LIMIT per day, so I think that also pairs up with the new statement about accelerated crafting in town, that one would be able to finish things faster by making the 2000gp per day in 8 hours of uninterrupted in town crafting, so if we're trying to stick with RAW, I think thats the way to go.

My gm also hates the possibility of 2000+gp per full day of crafting in town so we've worked out similar particulars (Between my arcane builder discovery and accelerated crafting, as long as i'm not interrupted and take the proper precautions I can get that 1000 done in 3 straight uninterrupted hours whether i'm in town or not, and thus never have to interrupt his campaign by saying 'hey party, lets take a week off so I can craft us up to 150%wbl!!! by taking full 8 hour 2600gp days in town)... Our wbl is lower because I craft less per day, and the campaign keeps rolling because we dont have days where we just sit around in town. But all that's just being nice to each other...

It could arguably be reasonable (but not RAI) to say '1000gp per day is tiring whether you do it in 8 hours or 4 hours or 3 hours, and that after 1000gp of progress your hands and mind are so frapped that you just have to step outside and get some sunshine' but you're right that the new language 'accelerated crafting in town to speed up the process' puts that interpretation back on shaky ground, unless what its referring to is simply the fact that crafting in town is less likely to get interrupted and is de-facto very much more likely to yield the same results faster. But none of those nuances that have been tossed around in the crafting forums are really clarified in any by the new material it seems and none of them are germaine to your question. All of this 1000 in 4 hours uninterrupted on the road stuff is still going to be the wonderful grey area world of RAI as it always has. And none of that is RAW. And with regard to the question you pose here, none of that is relevant... What's relevant is this...

In this particular case there's enough clarity in the actual text to know for sure if the cap is [1000gp per day] or [8 hours per day], and in this case the cap is 8 hours, not 1000gp. Fast crafting doesnt reduce the 8 hour cap, so your ROTRL GM's use of the 1000gp cap instead isn't even RAI. It's houseruling that after 1000gp of crafting you're too tired to do more, which isn't supported by the RAW text in any way. At the end of the day a careful reading of RAW does state that the daily limit is an hourly one of 8 hours, and that accelerated crafting increases your rate but does not in any way state or even imply decreasing your daily 8 hour maximum. Meaning instead of a daily GP limit, those 8 hours of accelerated crafting by an arcane builder can get you 2666gp in a day by RAW and the new text would be in line with those assumptions.

If RAW is king, then you've got it right about the higher daily productivity. If houserules are king then your gm is free to do whatever he likes and RAW doesnt matter. Your posts suggest you're interested in RAW. And you're right. By RAW, 2000gp per day with fast crafting is correct and not written 'vaguely with wiggle room' at all.

Thanks Vincent, that's a very cogent write-up! Could I ask Sean to come in and put paid to this question by giving an official thumps-up or thumps-down? :)

A question about earning capital / income from a room or team.

This is a quote from page 92.

"Most of the time, it’s simplest and quickest to just apply all the gp bonuses from all the rooms in each of your buildings and take 10 on the roll. Other times, you might want to generate other types of capital to construct new rooms, recruit new teams, and make upgrades."

Why would I ever want to combine the bonuses and take 10 on the roll?

Say I have a building with six rooms generating capital and income. For the sake of discussion, say each room generates +8.
Why would I want to do 8+8+8+8+8+8+take10=58?
When I can do 8+take10=18, 8+take10=18, 8+take10=18, 8+take10=18, 8+take10=18, 8+take10=18.

The rules do not specifically say I am required to combine the rooms when rolling for the same type of resource.

Maybe I've missed it, but did anyone else get the idea of making Goods and Magic some kind of treasure, and Influence and Labor a quest reward?

I think in Kingmaker you can get Build Points from stuff you are finding on your adventures. If you would raid a bandit camp, you could get some Goods and Magic from the bandits loot, and might also get some Influence and Labor from the grateful locals.

On pages 79-80, under the "Rewards" section of Gaining Capital, are some specific suggestions along this line.

Oh yeah, there it is.

One thing that came up in another thread is that you could have 10 Elite Guards working as mercenaries out of a Bunks building, but they would make the same profit if they also had a Kitchen and Dojo. They need a building to work from, but there does not seem to be any limitation to what they bulding could be. Since they are not actually staffing the Bunks to hire it out to customers, I think they could potentially even opperate out of an Alchemy Lab.

Is that left to the GM to judge, or did I miss another paragraph that deals with this?

Something about upkeep.

On page 81 under the upkeep phase it says this.

"Step 1—Add Up Costs: These costs include ongoing or recurring costs for your buildings, organizations, and other previous downtime activities that have accrued since the last time you have had a downtime session"

On page 92 under Earnings it says this.

"For a room, the Earnings amount already subtracts the cost of having unskilled employees to do the basic work for you. For example, the Earnings listed for having a Bar already account for the wages of a bartender and servers. For a team, the Earnings amount assumes they are working at a building you own. If you don’t provide a building for the team to work in or from, halve the Earnings for that team."

I can find no references about the upkeep costs of rooms, teams, buildings or organizations. Only thing I can find is the wages for managers. What am I missing?

One of the writers mentioned in another thread that in UCam itself, there are actually no rooms that have an upkeep cost. They just left it in if the might add more rooms in later products that do have it.

Are there downloads of the various sheets in the book available?

Not yet, but one of the Paizo staff (I think) mentioned it being in preparation.

This may of came up already, but I appreciate that the Relationship rules wording have changed in regards to experience. It's not just "you gain" but "your party gains". This works better for my campaign as my players are cool with me giving out the xp will be given out on an even field. But what's great is, you can use the old wording if each person's xp is on it's own track. Yay flexible options!

I also appreciate the cool Ulfen artwork in the Honor section.

Oh yeah, there it is.

One thing that came up in another thread is that you could have 10 Elite Guards working as mercenaries out of a Bunks building, but they would make the same profit if they also had a Kitchen and Dojo. They need a building to work from, but there does not seem to be any limitation to what they bulding could be. Since they are not actually staffing the Bunks to hire it out to customers, I think they could potentially even opperate out of an Alchemy Lab.

Is that left to the GM to judge, or did I miss another paragraph that deals with this?

Page 92, Earnings.

I think the more important bit is that a building either *is* a business earning money (or Capital) or *is not* a business (and houses you, your allies, etc.). Check out the examples of Downtime Phases on pages 81-83 for buildings used and not used as businesses.. that may help make that part more clear.

Anyone an idea why a Garrison provides a discount for a Granary?

And why does it provide no Defense bonus, even though the Barracks and Castle do?

Just got the book today and I also see the paper quality as being matte, though some pages come off as semi-gloss. Doesn't really bother me that much, just takes a bit to get used too.

Does seem though that I got a misprinted book though. Pages 161-192 are printed twice in my copy. Anyone else seen this as well?

Already got a replacement being shipped from Amazon, so no worries there. Just hope the replacement is correct.

Just got the book today and I also see the paper quality as being matte, though some pages come off as semi-gloss. Doesn't really bother me that much, just takes a bit to get used too.

Does seem though that I got a misprinted book though. Pages 161-192 are printed twice in my copy. Anyone else seen this as well?

Already got a replacement being shipped from Amazon, so no worries there. Just hope the replacement is correct.

Just checked mine and the pages are normal in it; no misprint.

Is it just me or the mass combat rules are kinda... too simple? Acording to them, 200 mentally challenged lepper peasants using rotten clubs as weapons have the same stats (besides HP) of 200 lvl 1 warriors using heavy armor, shields and long swords...

It needs some HEAVY modding to actually become usable. Weapons, armor, attributes, they don't matter. Shouldn't a dwarf army be more resilient than a elf one (same base stats, numbers and class). Also, no armor is better than full plate, shields don't exist, daggers are your friends... I expected more, really =/

Is there a more detailed version of this rules created by the community? Or I'm better of houserulling the s-word out of it?

Yup. They are called Warpath.

Well, masterwork and magic weapons do make a difference. But I think with the large amount of people and the massive pandemonium equalizes different armors and weapons.

EDIT: It seems that with your OM and DM based off of ACR, that means gear will play a bigger part. That's because having better gear means a high CR. So a group of NPC classes with mediocre gear will be beaten by a group of PC classes with better gear. It's still more simplified, but it does at least take into account gear somewhat.

Another couple of clarification questions...

1. On the army sheet it lists MAX. ARMIES on the same line as the General. Does the General's stats/level decide the number of armies? Or does something else?

This is an artifact of a rules concept I had for creating armies in a different way. In the end, the published rules used the same basic army structure as in the original KM mass combat rules, so that box means nothing.

Now if, say, someone were to create a product that did give you a use for that spot... then it'd probably be coming out at the beginning of next month, in time for PaizoCon. Just sayin.

2. Are there prerequisites for having an army made up of a specific class (i.e. Paladins, Monks, Wizards) and what decides the max size of these types of armies?

In UC? No. However, you might find rules for precisely that right about here.

3. What is the max level of troop a kingdom can create?

That isn't something we really covered in UC, other than by implication in the sample armies provided. However, you might find rules for precisely that right about here.

4. How long does it take to form an army?

Forming an army in UC takes one kingdom turn, so essentially one month. Creating, equipping, or reforming an army is a kingdom turn action that replaces founding a settlement on the "Improvement Edict" temple (it's described in the footnotes to that table).

If you want a more naturalistic rule for gathering armies... see the response to question #1 above.

Thank you!

(Also Jason, I'm going to be buying your book tomorrow...I love this kingdom building stuff and I can't get enough. Plus, your work is always amazing :)

Thanks for the kind words. I hope you enjoy the book!

Just got the book today and I also see the paper quality as being matte, though some pages come off as semi-gloss. Doesn't really bother me that much, just takes a bit to get used too.

Does seem though that I got a misprinted book though. Pages 161-192 are printed twice in my copy. Anyone else seen this as well?
Already got a replacement being shipped from Amazon, so no worries there. Just hope the replacement is correct.

That's an error that sometimes happens at the factory where the book is printed and bound. Having the seller (Amazon?) send you a replacement copy is the way to go.

I really like the new paper quality. I find it easier to change pages than with glossy pages. Definitely a keeper!

A question about earning capital / income from a room or team.

This is a quote from page 92.

"Most of the time, it’s simplest and quickest to just apply all the gp bonuses from all the rooms in each of your buildings and take 10 on the roll. Other times, you might want to generate other types of capital to construct new rooms, recruit new teams, and make upgrades."

Why would I ever want to combine the bonuses and take 10 on the roll?

Say I have a building with six rooms generating capital and income. For the sake of discussion, say each room generates +8.
Why would I want to do 8+8+8+8+8+8+take10=58?
When I can do 8+take10=18, 8+take10=18, 8+take10=18, 8+take10=18, 8+take10=18, 8+take10=18.

The rules do not specifically say I am required to combine the rooms when rolling for the same type of resource.

Because you only roll once per building per my reading of it:

Buildings and organizations act like characters in that they can attempt a check each day to earn capital performing skilled work.

...
You can apply each room’s or team’s bonus to any one listed type or capital each day or divide it among multiple listed types of capital.

So normally, you'd go through each room deciding what type of capital the bonus from that room applies to each day, and then make a roll for each one. But the easiest thing to do is assume they're all gp and that you took 10.

Your point is valid a little further down the page, however, where it lets you add your buildings or organizations together instead of rolling separately.

Is it just me or the mass combat rules are kinda... too simple? Acording to them, 200 mentally challenged lepper peasants using rotten clubs as weapons have the same stats (besides HP) of 200 lvl 1 warriors using heavy armor, shields and long swords...

Not quite. The aforementioned lepers would be lower than normal CR due to their subpar equipment, which means instead of being CR 1/3 they'd be CR 1/4, and since their weapons are also broken and they are mentally challenged you'd probably drop them to CR 1/6.

Contrariwise, the 1st-level warriors you describe above have too much gear for their WBL; in fact, they actually have more gear than a 1st-level PC would have (a long sword, heavy shield, and splint mail, the cheapest heavy armor, would cost 222 gp, which is well over the average for a 1st-level fighter (175) and close to the statistical maximum), and PC-level gear usually warrants a 1-step CR upgrade, so your CR 1/3 warriors become CR 1/2.

So, your army of lepers would need to be 600 strong to be equivalent to 200 heavily armed warriors.

I'd still put my money on the warriors in a real fight, but 3-to-1 odds is a far cry from there being no difference between them.

It needs some HEAVY modding to actually become usable.

That depends on one's definitions of HEAVY and usable, but by all means mod to your heart's content! I know I do in my campaign, and so should everyone to find the right balance of granularity and fun value.

The decision was made to keep the basic mass combat structure light and not uber-detailed, like the original KM mass combat rules. If you want mass combat with a HEAVY increase in individual variation between units, this may not be the best system to suit your tastes.

That, or you might look forward to 3rd party rules expansions to the kingdom-building rules. This product, for instance, has much more detail about military recruitment and overall militarism and military readiness of a kingdom. As for the actual conduct of battle... stay tuned.

Weapons, armor, attributes, they don't matter.

Sure they do. See above. They don't matter hugely on their own (other than providing bonuses to OM and DV), because in a mass battle abstract combat system the particular weapons used don't matter much whether they're axes, maces, swords, or guisarme-voulges, or bows or crossbows or guns. The system is purposefully vague on those points because it's designed to be a quick-play mass combat diversionary game, not a mass battles miniatures simulation.

Shouldn't a dwarf army be more resilient than a elf one (same base stats, numbers and class). Also, no armor is better than full plate, shields don't exist, daggers are your friends... I expected more, really =/

Their racial traits will be a bit different, though not hugely different. I'm not sure what you mean by the armor and daggers comments.

Is there a more detailed version of this rules created by the community? Or I'm better of houserulling the s-word out of it?

See above. Check out other systems to see if you find one more to your liking, or wait a few weeks for the release of another 3rd party product that covers a lot of this ground in much greater detail and with some alternate ways to deal with mass combat in ways that keep all the players involved.

Hope you enjoy the rest of the book!

Dude, I got to say that you have a talent for promotion in every opportunity XD

I do intend to get said product. I liked UC quite a bit, but it is indeed kinda incomplete.

About the modding, I kinda understand the way you guys elaborated the mass combat rules. I do want for rules that are somewhat more detailed, though. For an example, rules that took in consideration racial attributes, like a dwarf's constitution, elves dexterity or an orc's prodigious strength.

ujjjjjjjj did mention warpath - and I read a friend's one - but it carries the HP problem all the same, not to mention that it being a wargame distances it too much from the usual game (even if the players become powerhouses in it).
Hope said 3rd party product that will also be promoted like it's the second coming deals with this. Please, both rules for mass combat I've seen in pathfinder up to now where kinda underwhelming.

Oh, the dagger and armor comments were references to weapons and armor don't mattering. As the rules didn't consider specifically what equipment you are using, simply using daggers and no armor would technically make no difference. You did explain how that's not true, thanks for that.

But can you say if said product will have rules that consider more profoundly equipment, attributes and the like? A mid-point between a mass battle miniatures simulation (warpath) and a (to me) too simplified mass combat from UC? If so, it will certainly be on my shopping cart when it comes out.

obs: I do like the rules, and I think that simple things like considering if you are using light/one handed/two handed weapons, light/medium/heavy armor and shields - maybe a simple +1 for each of them - would already go a long way for the system. Call me a rules maniac, but I like it =p

Jason Nelson, continuing to study the Kingdom building rules I am curious about three of the buildings, Bureau, Foreign Quarter, and Stockyard. These are the only buildings (that I saw) with penalties to the main 3 kingdom attributes (-1 Loyalty for the Bureau and -1 Stability for the Foreign Quarter and Stockyard). Is this a typo?

I can imagine that lawyers (Bureau) cause a loyalty penalty and Foreigners cause a Stability penalty but why would a Stockyard cause a Stability penalty?

Thanks in advance. :)

- Gauss

Sean, any chance you could clarify the accelerated crafting thing I asked last page? :)

I too am interested in what Magnuskn asked. Specifically if crafting is limited on a per day basis by hours or GP value

Building some armies, I noticed that the rules really seem to be geared for massive combat. For small scale E6 warfare, it doesn't seem that great because I always end up with units that are only CR 1 and lower.

10 Hill giants are ACR 1 with 4 hp, 50 ogres are ACR 1 with 4 hp, 50 3rd level barbarians are ACR 1/2 with 3 hp, 100 elite archers (warrior 3) are ACR 1 with 5 hp, 100 cavalry (warrior 1) are ACR 1 with 5 hp and +2 DV and OM.

If you have small border towns fighting off raiders, those are actually quite substential forces and you are probabl not going to see anything much bigger.

Now I am wondering, would it make any difference if I simple move one of the colums of the army size table by one step, so that a medium unit consists of just 50 soldiers, or a small unit has an ACR equal to the CR of the soldiers? I don't think so, but it would bring more variety to the stats of the units.