I forget where it's located, but you start with 50 BP.
Okay, I'm getting in on this late in the game, but my group will be finishing up Stolen Lands in a month or so and I'm just delving into the Kingdom Building rules.
I'm a little stumped by the first round of building. I understand you skip phase I in the first round. This puts you directly into the improvement phase. Step 1 is to choose leadership. Okay so far. Step 2 is to Claim Hexes. You claim a hex by spending 1 BP. Only this is the first hex, so where does this BP come from? Is there a starting amount of BP that comes from Brevoy? Do they start with nothing and have to pony up 4000 GP for each BP until the village produces BP on it's own? What exactly to the PCs get at the beginning to start their kingdom? Where can I find this in RRR?
**ninja'ed!**
Oops. Never mind. Found it on page 55 in the right hand column, Treasury paragraph.
|
Okay, I'm getting in on this late in the game, but my group will be finishing up Stolen Lands in a month or so and I'm just delving into the Kingdom Building rules.
I'm a little stumped by the first round of building. I understand you skip phase I in the first round. This puts you directly into the improvement phase. Step 1 is to choose leadership. Okay so far. Step 2 is to Claim Hexes. You claim a hex by spending 1 BP. Only this is the first hex, so where does this BP come from? Is there a starting amount of BP that comes from Brevoy? Do they start with nothing and have to pony up 4000 GP for each BP until the village produces BP on it's own? What exactly to the PCs get at the beginning to start their kingdom? Where can I find this in RRR?
You start with 50 BP that is given to you by the Swordlords of Restov as a startup fund. This is mentioned in RRR. Not sure what page though.
|
You start with 50 BP that is given to you by the Swordlords of Restov as a startup fund. This is mentioned in RRR. Not sure what page though.Okay, I'm getting in on this late in the game, but my group will be finishing up Stolen Lands in a month or so and I'm just delving into the Kingdom Building rules.
I'm a little stumped by the first round of building. I understand you skip phase I in the first round. This puts you directly into the improvement phase. Step 1 is to choose leadership. Okay so far. Step 2 is to Claim Hexes. You claim a hex by spending 1 BP. Only this is the first hex, so where does this BP come from? Is there a starting amount of BP that comes from Brevoy? Do they start with nothing and have to pony up 4000 GP for each BP until the village produces BP on it's own? What exactly to the PCs get at the beginning to start their kingdom? Where can I find this in RRR?
On page 8, under the Part One: Home Sweet Home section, third paragraph. Starts at the top of the second column of text on page 8.
|
|
While we are still on the subject of Items I'll have to add a few points from my views as a player and DM:
If there is any campaign in which a PC could get away with demanding an item for free this would be it in my mind. You can make any moral justification according to your alignment for this action. A good character can see a threat to his kingdom nearby and see a powerful item that would without a doubt aid in the defense of the common good, at that point it could become an evil act to not take the item(perhaps he just wants to borrow it for a month). Neutrals and evil PCs could act in the same way.Furthermore the Sixth River Freedom is "you have what you hold" in a land where even the common people may have taken a turn a banditry to survive, the disloyalty factor does not make a lot sense to me.Lastly merchants usually don't care what happens to the competition unless they are a consortium/incorporated monopoly.
So my alternative would be to let it happen once or even twice, after that it's clear this may be a habit of the new king and slam a -2 penalty to the economy or send an assassin. If it continues increase the penalty or simply use the existing rules.
As for the Kingdom erupting into civil strife because the King seized the Uber Axe +1. That sounds like a fault with the system and very hilarious.
"How dare the King seize that axe I could never hope to afford, off with his head!"
Either way it seems like a tricky issue that will most likely come up for a few people. I don't even want to think about PCs merely requesting discounts or free mundane items.
I think the most important thing here is the River Freedom. "You have what you hold." This doesn't mean you can steal anything. You have to be able to fight for it. In a ruler's or even a council member's case, what commoner or expert is oing to fight and (if extremely lucky) win or even kill. We know how PCs can hold grudges. I don't think good characters would take. They might establish a loan plan or something of that nature. Evil characters would. But they have minions and alot of them. Who would come to the defense of poor shopkeeper in the face of the secret police, army, and what have you.
On the other hand, if you are a DM, and the players do decide o go ahead and try, remember a powerful character had to create the item. A pity for the players if he happens to be there to "discourage" theft, not necessarily from the PC's.
Who would come to the defense of poor shopkeeper in the face of the secret police, army, and what have you?
Almost every character I have ever played.
Seriusly, folks who employ goon methods to steal from their citizens (and that's what this is) are likely to attract attention from do-gooders, some of whom might be powerful enough to cause problems. Being the target of a paldin's smite should get their attention.
I can see some limited justification for seizing property in the name of the public good if the kingdom faces an imminent threat that the entire population is aware of and agrees is a threat (WW II, for example), but not if the threat is more distant and not all agree it is a threat (Vietnam, for example). Even then, it will be resented, particularly if the government could afford to pay for itbut chooses not to.
And why do players want to do this kind of stuff? It is basically having your character be an a#~%~&~. Do people really want to roleplay a&!!&#!s or play with people who roleplay a$#&&#~s? Aren't there more than enough of them in the real world to deal with?
When selling magic items it says you do so through "the cities markets", Does this mean that before you can sell ANY magic items you MUST have built the rather expensive market building?
When selling magic items it says you do so through "the cities markets", Does this mean that before you can sell ANY magic items you MUST have built the rather expensive market building?
No, you can just sell one per city district.
Although that would be an interesting house rule...
|
|
Who would come to the defense of poor shopkeeper in the face of the secret police, army, and what have you?Almost every character I have ever played.
Seriusly, folks who employ goon methods to steal from their citizens (and that's what this is) are likely to attract attention from do-gooders, some of whom might be powerful enough to cause problems. Being the target of a paldin's smite should get their attention.
I can see some limited justification for seizing property in the name of the public good if the kingdom faces an imminent threat that the entire population is aware of and agrees is a threat (WW II, for example), but not if the threat is more distant and not all agree it is a threat (Vietnam, for example). Even then, it will be resented, particularly if the government could afford to pay for itbut chooses not to.
And why do players want to do this kind of stuff? It is basically having your character be an a&#*&%!. Do people really want to roleplay a+&#~*!s or play with people who roleplay a+@$!&$s? Aren't there more than enough of them in the real world to deal with?
My point is, no good character would steal from their people.
As to who would want to play such characters, it is role playing. It is a chance to be someone and something you could never do in real life. Besides, it is the villins who make a story great. Where Peter Pan be without Captain Hook. Where would G.I.Joe be without Cobra. Where would... well you get the idea. Granted most of the time it is great to play a hero who saves the world and gets the girl. But this can be cliche and once in awhile it is good to break away and be the villain. I'm just saying.
Who would come to the defense of poor shopkeeper in the face of the secret police, army, and what have you?Almost every character I have ever played.
Seriusly, folks who employ goon methods to steal from their citizens (and that's what this is) are likely to attract attention from do-gooders, some of whom might be powerful enough to cause problems. Being the target of a paldin's smite should get their attention.
I can see some limited justification for seizing property in the name of the public good if the kingdom faces an imminent threat that the entire population is aware of and agrees is a threat (WW II, for example), but not if the threat is more distant and not all agree it is a threat (Vietnam, for example). Even then, it will be resented, particularly if the government could afford to pay for itbut chooses not to.
And why do players want to do this kind of stuff? It is basically having your character be an a&#*&%!. Do people really want to roleplay a+&#~*!s or play with people who roleplay a+@$!&$s? Aren't there more than enough of them in the real world to deal with?
My point is, no good character would steal from their people.
As to who would want to play such characters, it is role playing. It is a chance to be someone and something you could never do in real life. Besides, it is the villins who make a story great. Where Peter Pan be without Captain Hook. Where would G.I.Joe be without Cobra. Where would... well you get the idea. Granted most of the time it is great to play a hero who saves the world and gets the girl. But this can be cliche and once in awhile it is good to break away and be the villain. I'm just saying.
Oh, I know lots of people like to play villains, for one reason or another. I even started a thread a few months ago trying to understand it better. While people gave me lots of insight into their motivations, I have to confess I still don't really understand the appeal. As I said, I have to deal with enough jerks in real life. Why in the world would I want to roleplay one or deal with others roleplaying them in my limited spare time? As for your examples, you'll note that while they are compelling characters, none of these classic villains are the protagonists in their stories, and they always lose in the end. I like it that way. I know there are more "sophisticated" stories featuring anti-heroes of one shade or another, but I tend to dislike those stories and avoid them. In my fantasy life, I like the good guyd to win. YMMV.
|
|
I agree totally. 99.9% of the time I try to avoid totally evil characters. But That .1% can be fun. I especially love the bad guy that spys in the group only to be redeemed (with the DMs permission of course). But again there are different levels of evil. I could never play a truly evil character. My "evil" characters always are loyal to their friends and only do evil to those who threaten them or their friends. The whole "no quarter to enemies" thing.
|
Okay, I'm getting in on this late in the game, but my group will be finishing up Stolen Lands in a month or so and I'm just delving into the Kingdom Building rules.
I'm a little stumped by the first round of building. I understand you skip phase I in the first round. This puts you directly into the improvement phase. Step 1 is to choose leadership. Okay so far. Step 2 is to Claim Hexes. You claim a hex by spending 1 BP. Only this is the first hex, so where does this BP come from? Is there a starting amount of BP that comes from Brevoy? Do they start with nothing and have to pony up 4000 GP for each BP until the village produces BP on it's own? What exactly to the PCs get at the beginning to start their kingdom? Where can I find this in RRR?
On page 8... they are given a charter and support in the form of 50 bp which represents a shipment of gold,tools,craftsmen,laborers, and colonists eager to make a new life in a new kingdom.I hope that helps. :-)
I agree totally. 99.9% of the time I try to avoid totally evil characters. But That .1% can be fun. I especially love the bad guy that spys in the group only to be redeemed (with the DMs permission of course). But again there are different levels of evil. I could never play a truly evil character. My "evil" characters always are loyal to their friends and only do evil to those who threaten them or their friends. The whole "no quarter to enemies" thing.
I agree. The only time in 33+ years of gaming that I ever played an evil character was years ago at a convention, playing an ogre cleric/assassin. The GM and I made the most of the comic potential of an ogre with a 6 Intelligence consulting with Vaprak the Destroyer via a Commune spell. It was lots of fun as a once off, but not something I would ever do for a whole campaign. I have played a couple of characters who definitely had rough edges over the years, though. Definitely not evil, but ruthless in pursuit of their (laudable) goals and against their evil enemies.
what turned out to be the consensus on negative unrest, aka your first building is a castle do you start with -4 unrest? Or would you only get this one time benefit if you built it when the state was already restless (which seems odder)
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
what turned out to be the consensus on negative unrest, aka your first building is a castle do you start with -4 unrest? Or would you only get this one time benefit if you built it when the state was already restless (which seems odder)
It seems odd to me too. I'm working on my own little system to allow PCs to benefit from getting negative unrest.
The PC's have a special pool of points called "Imperviousness" (name may change) that starts at 0. At the end of the improvement phase, give the PCs one point of imperviousness for every point that their unrest would have gone below 0. In the income and event phases, use imperviousness points first to negate unrest. So far this is basically the same as just letting unrest go negative.
However, imperviousness fades with time. After each event phase, roll a Loyalty check against the control DC.
On a failure, lose 1d6 imperviousness. Imperviousness cannot go below 0.
On a success, if you have more than 1 imperviousness, lose 1 imperviousness. If you succeed and have exactly 1 imperviousness, nothing happens (This is a bit clunky, but it makes sure that success is always better than failure, and helps out -1 unrest buildings).
If unrest is 0, the royal assassin can generate 1 imperviousness.
There will also be a cap on imperviousness. I'm still working on what that will be.
what turned out to be the consensus on negative unrest, aka your first building is a castle do you start with -4 unrest? Or would you only get this one time benefit if you built it when the state was already restless (which seems odder)It seems odd to me too. I'm working on my own little system to allow PCs to benefit from getting negative unrest.
....
That's quite a bit of complexity and effort. What problem are you trying to fix with it? Is not being able to accumulate negative unrest really that big of a problem? In the KM game I play in, we started to allow negative unrest to accumulate, but eventually went back to minimum of 0.
|
|
That's quite a bit of complexity and effort. What problem are you trying to fix with it? Is not being able to accumulate negative unrest really that big of a problem? In the KM game I play in, we started to allow negative unrest to accumulate, but eventually went back to minimum of 0.
It sounds more complicated than it is, probably because I didn't explain it very well :(
My reasons:
1)One of my players was bothered by the fact that the benefit of buildings that reduce unrest is so strongly tied to when you build them, and suggested giving some benefit for negative unrest. Other players agreed. So did I. Players prefer it + GM prefers it + not overpowered = win.
2)It gives another use for loyalty, which doesn't otherwise come up that often.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I actually really like that idea for exactly the reasons you mention. I probably wouldn't call it anything different than just "unrest" and letting the score be negative. I like that it gets reduced by 1d6 every kingdom event phase, but I'd probably use a loyalty check to halve that amount rather than eliminate it entirely. My reasoning is that it doesn't take too long before a kingdom will only fail checks on a 1. If the negative unrest never goes away, it'll be easy to rack up a lot of it before waging war in the later books.
On second thought, I may only have it be reduced by 1d4 each event phase with a loyalty check to reduce it by half. I may have to look at our kingdom's historical rate of building to see which works better.
|
|
Consumption works the same way - there is no negative Consumption. So created a Bank building that convert up to 2 points of negative Consumption into BP. I'd love a similar building to turn negative Unrest into ... "Good Will" that could be stored and used to mitigate Unrest later. Any ideas what that building could be?
If "two city blocks" are destroyed, and they're part of a larger area (say, the Arena or Noble Villa), do you only pay a percentage of the cost that was destroyed, or the whole thing?
If "two city blocks" are destroyed, and they're part of a larger area (say, the Arena or Noble Villa), do you only pay a percentage of the cost that was destroyed, or the whole thing?
I would work off of a percentage basis.
Thanks. That's what I ended up doing.
Is there a general advancement track for the kingdom similar to that of the characters?
How large should the kingdom be at the end of each chapter?
Is there a general advancement track for the kingdom similar to that of the characters?
How large should the kingdom be at the end of each chapter?
That is provided in the "kingdom in the background" sidebars for each chapter, usually near the beginning of the chapter.
That is provided in the "kingdom in the background" sidebars for each chapter, usually near the beginning of the chapter.Is there a general advancement track for the kingdom similar to that of the characters?
How large should the kingdom be at the end of each chapter?
I don't know why Paizo Finds it necessary to hide those things from me!
Thanks Turin!
Are the bonuses for barracks/watchtowers also treated like that, or do multiples stack?
Nope; that gets out of control too fast.
Multiple grids each need their own walls, but a whole city can't get more DM from walls than the basic wall bonus.
THAT SAID, multiple walls CAN help defend inner districts, if you get down to the nitty gritty and track mass combat attacks on a district-by-district basis rather than just a whole city at once.
I tried looking through to see if this was answered and I couldn't find it if it was, so I will ask - is the Dm from multiple Watchtowers (or multiple Barracks) additive or is the "a whole city can't get more DM from walls than the basic wall bonus" a generic rule that is applied to all buildings that provide a DM?
I tried looking through to see if this was answered and I couldn't find it if it was, so I will ask - is the Dm from multiple Watchtowers (or multiple Barracks) additive or is the "a whole city can't get more DM from walls than the basic wall bonus" a generic rule that is applied to all buildings that provide a DM?Are the bonuses for barracks/watchtowers also treated like that, or do multiples stack?
Nope; that gets out of control too fast.
Multiple grids each need their own walls, but a whole city can't get more DM from walls than the basic wall bonus.
THAT SAID, multiple walls CAN help defend inner districts, if you get down to the nitty gritty and track mass combat attacks on a district-by-district basis rather than just a whole city at once.
It all adds up.
Would it be game breaking if I made this house rule:
"Every four forest hexes adds +1 to the nations stability"
My justification for this is that lumber would be traded on a local scale (not an international one.) It also is used for most construction and many weapons.
I know that some people have developed rather intricate resource rules. I was just hoping to create an easy rule that gives forest hexes a purpose.
|
|
Would it be game breaking if I made this house rule:
"Every four forest hexes adds +1 to the nations stability"
My justification for this is that lumber would be traded on a local scale (not an international one.) It also is used for most construction and many weapons.
I know that some people have developed rather intricate resource rules. I was just hoping to create an easy rule that gives forest hexes a purpose.
You may want to pick up "Book of the River Nations" by Jon Brazer Ent, it has some optional rules in there that I'm going to incorporate in my game. For example, if you build your city close to a forest hex, you reduce consumption by one. There are alot of gems in there.
You may want to pick up "Book of the River Nations" by Jon Brazer Ent, it has some optional rules in there that I'm going to incorporate in my game. For example, if you build your city close to a forest hex, you reduce consumption by one. There are alot of gems in there.
Thanks, but not really.
I already spent a lot of money on the AP and times are tight.
Would that rule be game breaking or no?
I guess you are right Hall.
I have always been under the "real world influence" concerning the importance of logging.
You may want to pick up "Book of the River Nations" by Jon Brazer Ent
I just want to say I appreciate the endorsement. ;)
Your welcome. So when are you coming out with more River Kingdom goodness?!!
Assassins of the River Nations is in grammer editing (and as been for longer than I'd like). If I get some free time, I'd like to write up some pre-stated towns complete with defenses and possibly even a nation or two. I've already got art so that's not a problem.
Unfortunately free time is far to common these days. My secret project has become all consuming at this point and is probably going to stay that way until its official announcement in October. Its one massive project and just keeps getting more and more massive (almost by the day lately). The monster portion of it is being crunch edited at a vastly greater rate than I had anticipated. The editors are really amazing. I really have to hand it to them. They rock. After that, its onto the part of the project. I'm still lining up writers for that. I got a yes from 1 already (I haven't sent out the contract so I definitely can't say who) and am looking for 2-3 more. The biggest question right now for that part is who to ask.
Once they're writing I move onto the part of the project. I've got the outline done and sections of it written already. But this is probably the most critical part of the whole project. If I don't get this right, the whole of the project could really fall down.
After that there are 2 more parts that I'm not even thinking about yet, but I really have to, and soon. One has to be done by the October announcement. As in a prototype printed copy has to be in hand.
Why?
.
.
.
You'll see!!! ;)
|
|
Your welcome. So when are you coming out with more River Kingdom goodness?!!Assassins of the River Nations is in grammer editing (and as been for longer than I'd like). If I get some free time, I'd like to write up some pre-stated towns complete with defenses and possibly even a nation or two. I've already got art so that's not a problem.
Unfortunately free time is far to common these days. My secret project has become all consuming at this point and is probably going to stay that way until its official announcement in October. Its one massive project and just keeps getting more and more massive (almost by the day lately). The monster portion of it is being crunch edited at a vastly greater rate than I had anticipated. The editors are really amazing. I really have to hand it to them. They rock. After that, its onto the part of the project. I'm still lining up writers for that. I got a yes from 1 already (I haven't sent out the contract so I definitely can't say who) and am looking for 2-3 more. The biggest question right now for that part is who to ask.
Once they're writing I move onto the part of the project. I've got the outline done and sections of it written already. But this is probably the most critical part of the whole project. If I don't get this right, the whole of the project could really fall down.
After that there are 2 more parts that I'm not even thinking about yet, but I really have to, and soon. One has to be done by the October announcement. As in a prototype printed copy has to be in hand.
Why?
.
.
.
You'll see!!! ;)
How about some sneak peaks?! Please?
How about some sneak peaks?! Please?
Subscribers to my newsletter saw two pieces of artwork from the upcoming monster book. I'll be showing more in my next newsletter (a week-ish away). You can sign up on my website.
|
|
How about some sneak peaks?! Please?Subscribers to my newsletter saw two pieces of artwork from the upcoming monster book. I'll be showing more in my next newsletter (a week-ish away). You can sign up on my website.
k, done sir.
I got a yes from 1 already (I haven't sent out the contract so I definitely can't say who) and am looking for 2-3 more. The biggest question right now for that part is who to ask.
2 Yesses!!!
And I figure out the next writer I want to ask.
Does anyone else find that each block in a district, at 750-ft x 750-ft, is way too big? I know that the building one sets in each block is intended to represent a slew of buildings with the same general purpose, but it seems to me that, at that size, most of a district's buildings should be able to fit into a space only a fraction as large.
Would there be any unforeseen issues with simply scaling down each block to a 220-ft x 220-ft. square? That way, a district would only be a quarter-mile long with 16 districts fitting exactly into a square mile. That way there wouldn't be such a wide disconnect between what's represented in the city grid map and the actual layout of a district. Thoughts?
That's probably a more realistic scale, try it out and see how it plays out for us lazy buggers. ^_^
|
Does anyone else find that each block in a district, at 750-ft x 750-ft, is way too big? I know that the building one sets in each block is intended to represent a slew of buildings with the same general purpose, but it seems to me that, at that size, most of a district's buildings should be able to fit into a space only a fraction as large.
Would there be any unforeseen issues with simply scaling down each block to a 220-ft x 220-ft. square? That way, a district would only be a quarter-mile long with 16 districts fitting exactly into a square mile. That way there wouldn't be such a wide disconnect between what's represented in the city grid map and the actual layout of a district. Thoughts?
You should consider that in a medieval city there was a good number of fields and vegetable gardens near the houses, and most of the houses were 1 or 2 story buildings.
So probably most of the block is fields, gardens and streets.
Still large, but the constructed part not so big at it can seem.
Question about the hex map.
My players, the lovely group of expansionists that they are, have already expressed interests in expanding the kingdom outside the maps that are given in the adventure paths. Honestly, I could see them moving into Brevoy (yes, I'm aware that would be war), but they see the nobles of Brevoy as squabbling bastards who don't take care of their people. My question is how do we convert the nation of Brevoy into a hex map? Is there a formula, has someone already done it? Can I somehow use the map given with the Inner Sea guide to make the conversion? It would just make expansion easier using the hex system. Any help would be appreciated.