Drage13's page

Any thought to adding a spot for the Natural Ruler feat? Apologies if this is somewhere and I'm missing it, but I'm not seeing it on the Rulers page, which is where I thought I would have seen it.

So we are running Aqueducts to Olegton, which will allow for water-dependent buildings. How have most people done this? Just say that it allows you to pick/add a water border to the settlement? Trying to figure out how/where to place a Foundry at Olegton's.

Am I correct that, under UCam/UR, it's feasible just to build a canal in the hex where Oleg's trading post is (not adjacent to any kind of river/water) and the water requirement for farms is taken care of?

I'm pulling the requirement from the Table: Terrain and Terrain Improvements.

4 Farm cost represents the BP cost to cultivate a hex for farming. a Farm must be within or adjacent to a hex containing a river, lake, swamp, or Canal, or adjacent to at least 2 hexes that already contain Farms.

I feel like I must be missing something.

Continued thanks for everyone's assistance!

We created our colony at the Stag Lord's fort and have been slowly expanding toward Oleg's. As we are about to claim them, using a tweaked version of the free city rules, I noticed that they don't seem to have access to water. The GM had tentatively had Oleg's colony claiming hexes to their East and North, so none of those hexes have a river, or are adjacent to a river. As such, in theory, they couldn't build farms.

This seemed incredibly odd to me. My understanding is that one of the suggested starting points was actually Oleg's trading post. So legitimately one of the suggested starting points is where you can not build farms for 3-5 months? That's what it looks like to me, if you rely on getting two hexes on/adjacent to water and build farms on them, then connect the rest of your hexes/farms so that they're touching two other farms.

I looked at running an aqueduct, but that doesn't give water to a farm, just to a settlement, so that doesn't solve the farm issue. Now I'm looking at a canal. It looks to me that the canal hex improvement does not require any sort of connections or adjacency at all. Is that accurate? You can just build a canal hex improvement in a hex that is no where near a river/lake/marsh/ocean and you just created a river network in that hex? If so, I guess I rescind my implied criticism of Oleg's being a suggested starting point.

Am I correct in thinking that there are no buildings that reduce corruption? I'm not even coming across an event that reduces it. Crime can be managed by building jails, but you just get to accumulate whatever corruption occurs, barring GM involvement?

When a Fort becomes a Barracks and a Stable, should they be added to a City District (i.e., they take up lots), or should it not? I can see it going either way - the fort may not necessarily be within the city, but everything else that you described could still be true.

Thank you again for all of your help!

I've not been able to find a definitive explanation on how a Fort in a hex with a settlement works. The verbiage that I'm reading says that if the hex becomes a settlement, the hex improvement counts as a barracks and a stables.

Does it mean that you remove the effects that you were receiving from having a fort in that hex (+2 Stability, +4 Defense, +1 Consumption) and then replace them with the effects that you received from a barracks and a stables (+1 Economy, +1 Loyalty, +2 Defense, +1 Law, base gold value +500GP)? This is what I've read implied in a forum post before, but this doesn't make sense to me. Why would having a fort in a hex with your settlement DECREASE the amount of defense it provides, or DECREASE the amount of consumption needed to support it? Plus it would be a horrible exchange - your 24 BP fort gets removed and replaced with 16 BPs worth of buildings.

Perhaps does it mean that you also add the benefits of having another barracks and stables, in addition to the benefit of having a fort? So you go from just the effects of having the fort (+2 Stability, +4 Defense, +1 Consumption) to the effects of having the fort, a barracks and a stables ((+1 Economy, +1 Loyalty, +2 Stability, +6 Defense, +1 Law, +1 Consumption, base gold value +500GP)? This makes more sense to me, but seems VERY attractive, so I wanted get some impartial feedback.

Either way this is supposed to work, am I supposed to add a stables building and a barracks building to my city district map? I'm thinking not.

A question about events:

At the closing of Month 1, we rolled an event (I think technically there's supposed to be a grace period at the beginning, to prevent crippling things from happening to your fledgling kingdom, but most of the PCs wanted to do one anyways). We rolled the Squatters event.

******************SPOILERS******************

If my reference material is correct, Squatters decrease Fame and Stability by 1 each and increases unrest; our GM also added the flavor of the squatters destroyed the House lot that we had built in the first month (harsh, but he's generally generous, so RP-wise we sometimes get lower "lows" but also get higher "highs", so we're fine with this). We successfully passed a Stability check to disperse them. We then built another House lot that following month, including the 1BP discount for rebuilding a building in its destroyed lot.

My question is, when should we consider the modifiers (i.e., -1 Fame, -1 Stability) permanent and when are they temporary? For Squatters, since we passed the check, the event isn't "continuous", so does that mean that the modifiers were temporary? Or are all modifiers permanent and the "continuous" portion is only referring to the lot being unusable until the event is resolved?

Thank you for the advice. The trouble that we're potentially running into is that a few of our players (7 PCs) have little or no interest in the kingdom building portion of the adventure path, while a few are rather interested in it and I'm finding myself obsessed with it.

Speaking of obsession....

I remembered when I woke up this morning that I was still looking for that guidance about building new city districts. Do you know if I'm on the right track in my interpretations? And I am also trying to figure out if preparing a settlement takes a "build slot", either building-wise or hex improvement-wise.

HOLY MOLY! I completely missed that paragraph; the ramifications of that rule are huge.

I had tentatively planned on having the capital city be a sprawling metropolis, with at least one of every building. In fact, my original plans call for having the second district being a sort of "capital" district, where 35 out of 36 lots were full of fame buildings. Building all of the fame buildings in our capital city will increase our consumption by a whopping 16+ or so beyond the 4-6 consumption that our city normal would run. That's a huge cost from UR compared to UC.

Thank you for your help on this; looks like we'll have to make some tough decisions about how important "doing everything" will be in the campaign.

Hello!

Player managing my group's campaign via Chemlak's masterful spreadsheet tracker. We're generally using the Ultimate Rulership (UR) rules, but sometimes reverting to Ultimate Campaign (UC) for some pieces (i.e., we're not a fan of the alternate edicts [for holidays, promotion, etc.], so we're just adding the special edicts from UR and keeping the others from UC the same).

Anyways, I have a couple questions I'm hoping folks can help me with. I'm using a second spreadsheet of my own design to plan for future months between gaming sessions, to help things go smoother. I then check the results of what I come up with against Chemlak's, do make sure I'm doing things correctly. I've hit a couple bumps in the road a few months in.

Building new city districts - My interpretation of the UC rules is that preparing a second city district can only be done after the first city district is (completely) full. Then, per UC, you pay the preparation BP, just as though you were building "a new settlement", so in the case of hills, it would be 2BP and would take a month. Does "settlement prep" take the place of one of the hex improvements that you can do that month, or perhaps does it take the place of the number of settlements you can create that month, or perhaps it doesn't count against either? However, per UR, as near as I can tell, you do not need to do any preparation, so no wait time, only costs 1 BP to add a district and it can be done once the first district is half full. Am I on the right track so far?

Settlement consumption - Per UC, I believe consumption for settlements is 1 BP per district, regardless of the "fullness" of the district. UR, however, is more granular, going from 0.5 BP (round down) for a village, 1 BP for a town (one district half full or less) and 2 BP per district for a city/metropolis (regardless of how full the subsequent districts are). Assuming I'm right so far, something strange seems to occur when I hit month 8 in the URule spreadsheet; I go from 1 city consumption to 2, even though, by my count, I still only have one district with 16 lots full, so we're still technically a town, not a city. Then, in month 9, we go from 2 city consumption to 3 city consumption. I still only have one settlement and I only have one city district. Did I miss something? My forecasted build order is below; not looking so much for optimization advice on the forecast, so much as guidance for why the settlement consumption is higher than I would have expected it to be.

Month 1 - Stockyard
Month 2 - House and Tannery
Month 3 - Baths
Month 4 - Brickyard
Month 5 - Stable
Month 6 - Dance Hall and House
Month 7 - Temple
Month 8 - Assembly
Month 9 - Graveyard and Crematorium

Hello all,

I am just starting into book 2 of Kingmaker and am exceedingly excited to get into the kingdom building. I've easily spent 100+ hours reading and rereading rules from different sources such as Ultimate Campaign and Ultimate Rulership, both of which the GM is pulling from (given the amount of reading I've done, I'm giving a little input). The downside is that some things I remember coming across are escaping me. I could swear that somewhere there were rules written for if you decided to have your PC spend the whole month ruling, rather than just the obligatory one week. I thought it gave something like a +2 to the kingdom score you contribute, or perhaps doubled your bonus. Can someone help point me to where I would have read that (assuming such a rule exists)?

Hello all,

First off, I apologize if this is blatantly obvious, but I'm having a little difficulty in figuring this out. This weekend at Con of the North will be my first foray into PFS, though I host a group of friends who have played different home-brew Pathfinder campaigns on-and-off for a few years now.

In my excitement to start getting into Society play, I came across adventure path books. I'm curious to know if they are suitable for Society play; I envision that my group will start playing Society at our weekly game night, so I am curious to know if these books would work, or if they would be only for non-Society play.

I found some specific books at Half-Price Books on sale pretty cheap, so I'd pick them up if we could use them for Society play.

Council of Thieves
Legacy of Fire
Serpent's Skull

Then there's also these Campaign Setting books. Any relevance to Society play?

Castles of the Inner Sea
Artifacts & Legends

Again, apologies if this is posted somewhere; I'm happy to look this up if someone can point me in the right area.

Thank you!