A quick side question to all this... I have been looking through the army creating rules and there's a quick note in the sample armies section that says:
So how exactly do I determine the availability of armies? The rules for custom armies above tell me nothing about costing the armies appropriately or what kind of loyalty checks are there to make... The sample armies seem to indicate that their availability is based on the size of the kingdom... why can't you conscript people from the cities? You can easily have a city of population 10,000+ with a kingdom size of 10 (eg 2500 rural population). So I'm a bit confused on how that works.
Additionally, What if my PCs want an army of 100 lvl 10 fighters instead of 2000 lvl 3 warriors? How do I cost something like that? What are the loyalty checks to be made? Are there any guidelines around for this?
I would say that if the PCs want a big badass army they have to actually prepare to have one -- build barracks, make sure they have stables and smithies, maybe a few more war-related buildings, build temples to war gods, that kind of thing. They'd have to do a lot of training (meaning armies on active duty, meaning paying for them) -- historically it took about a year to train a full-time professional soldier. (Today we can do it in six months or so, but guns are simpler than muscle weapons, and a long-service sergeant is still a lot more capable than a buck private.)
Generally I'd say militia are level 1 warriors, trained soldiers are level 2-3, veteran soldiers are level 4-5, and Caesar's Tenth Legion is level 6. Nobody has armies of 10th-level fighters. And veterans need experience -- there's only so much you can do with bloodless training.
Population 10,000 doesn't mean a 10,000-man army -- generally you can't get more than about 10% of the population into an army before your society collapses into total failure, because the army guys are often the young healthy _productive_ parts of society. (There are some exceptions to this rule, most of which amount to "very ugly situations".) I came up with a rough rule of thumb that the PCs could raise 100 troops/hex -- total. Casualties come off that limit and take lots of time to replace, years for new soldiers to grow up. So far it hasn't been an issue because the PCs have maintained a nice army that's deterred quite a few would-be attackers, but we're starting War of the River Kings and there should be some interesting fights coming up.
I would say that if the PCs want a big badass army they have to actually prepare to have one -- build barracks, make sure they have stables and smithies, maybe a few more war-related buildings, build temples to war gods, that kind of thing. They'd have to do a lot of training (meaning armies on active duty, meaning paying for them) -- historically it took about a year to train a full-time professional soldier. (Today we can do it in six months or so, but guns are simpler than muscle weapons, and a long-service sergeant is still a lot more capable than a buck private.)
Generally I'd say militia are level 1 warriors, trained soldiers are level 2-3, veteran soldiers are level 4-5, and Caesar's Tenth Legion is level 6. Nobody has armies of 10th-level fighters. And veterans need experience -- there's only so much you can do with bloodless training.
Population 10,000 doesn't mean a 10,000-man army -- generally you can't get more than about 10% of the population into an army before your society collapses into total failure, because the army guys are often the young healthy _productive_ parts of society. (There are some exceptions to this rule, most of which amount to "very ugly situations".) I came up with a rough rule of thumb that the PCs could raise 100 troops/hex -- total. Casualties come off that limit and take lots of time to replace, years for new soldiers to grow up. So far it hasn't been an issue because the PCs have maintained a nice army that's deterred quite a few would-be attackers, but we're starting War of the River Kings and there should be some interesting fights coming up.
That sounds like a pretty reasonable estimate for the 250/hex total population in rural areas... how do you justify the idea that a 10,000 person city can only produce 100 soldiers though?
|
A couple of changes on these boards did population and the number of soldiers that I thought was really neat. I plan on using both changes. The first one changes the formula to get the kingdom's population, it's basically the population of a city = econ mod + loyalty mod + stab mod + defense mod x 25 plus number of hexes x 250. so a city with +20 econ, +14 loyalty, +18 stabi, and +4 defense would have a population of 1,400 and with 12 hexes, that's another 3,000 citizens scattered across the kingdom. So kingdom population = 4,400.
And the second change, someone here created a new statistic for the kingdom called manpower. Manpower = total population divided by 1000. So with the above example, you would have a Manpower of 4.4.
And with # of soldiers, the poster used a different size modifier, something like Dim = .1, tiny = .3, small = .5, medium = 1, large = 2, ect. Those are the numbers that you can pull from that Manpower total. But that's just a couple ways of doing it anyway. so you could have max 4 medium armies and four diminuative armies, or 2 medium, 4 small, 3 tiny, and 1 diminuative.....
So how exactly do I determine the availability of armies? The rules for custom armies above tell me nothing about costing the armies appropriately or what kind of loyalty checks are there to make... The sample armies seem to indicate that their availability is based on the size of the kingdom... why can't you conscript people from the cities? You can easily have a city of population 10,000+ with a kingdom size of 10 (eg 2500 rural population). So I'm a bit confused on how that works.
I would say that if the PCs want a big badass army they have to actually prepare to have one -- build barracks, make sure they have stables and smithies, maybe a few more war-related buildings, build temples to war gods, that kind of thing. They'd have to do a lot of training (meaning armies on active duty, meaning paying for them) -- historically it took about a year to train a full-time professional soldier. (Today we can do it in six months or so, but guns are simpler than muscle weapons, and a long-service sergeant is still a lot more capable than a buck private.)
This also was covered in the Book of the River Nations. Like tonyz said, riding units require stables, divine caster units require temples and so forth.
We make it very Warcraft/Starcraft like that sense. There are ways you can upgrade your military units with better equipment. Plus we included ways for training time so this way you don't just pop a gargantuan army of 20th level fighters simply because you have the BP. It takes time to train them. It takes building building to properly equip them.
Additionally, we have rules for vassel armies, giving rulers perfectly valid reasons why you would allow a group of giants or kobolds or whatever to reside in your kingdom instead of just raising an army and destroying them.
|
Their control DC is somewhere near 35 and their modifiers are over 40, so we've stopped rolling (other than economy).
You always fail the checks on a roll of 1.
Stability, Economy, and Loyalty: These three values are analogous to saving throws. You make Stability checks during a kingdom’s Upkeep phase to determine whether it remains secure. You make Economy checks during a kingdom’s Income phase to determine how much its treasury increases. You make Loyalty checks to keep the public peace. A kingdom’s initial scores in all three of these categories is 0 + the kingdom’s alignment modifiers. A natural 1 is always a failure for these checks, and a natural 20 is always a success.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A quick side question to all this... I have been looking through the army creating rules and there's a quick note in the sample armies section that says:
** spoiler omitted **
So how exactly do I determine the availability of armies? The rules for custom armies above tell me nothing about costing the armies appropriately or what kind of loyalty checks are there to make... The sample armies seem to indicate that their availability is based on the size of the kingdom... why can't you conscript people from the cities? You can easily have a city of population 10,000+ with a kingdom size of 10 (eg 2500 rural population). So I'm a bit confused on how that works.
Additionally, What if my PCs want an army of 100 lvl 10 fighters instead of 2000 lvl 3 warriors? How do I cost something like that? What are the loyalty checks to be made? Are there any guidelines around for this?
I think book of River Nations does a much better job of explaining Army build rules with minimum populations being a great 'meter' stick for what you build. The 'story' part of what you are asking about is if you made friends with the centaurs you can make a centaur army. Or if you befriended the kobolds; ala kobold army.
how do you justify the idea that a 10,000 person city can only produce 100 soldiers though?
It's total population -- a lot of that 100-man-hex limit comes from the cities. (You could also say that city guys are not really good soldiers -- if you look at, for instance, 17th-century generals, they preferred peasant recruits rather than urban mobs, because the latter had no idea how to live outside a city, deal with bad weather and mud and animals, etc. etc. etc.)
A quick side question to all this... I have been looking through the army creating rules and there's a quick note in the sample armies section that says:
** spoiler omitted **
So how exactly do I determine the availability of armies? The rules for custom armies above tell me nothing about costing the armies appropriately or what kind of loyalty checks are there to make... The sample armies seem to indicate that their availability is based on the size of the kingdom... why can't you conscript people from the cities? You can easily have a city of population 10,000+ with a kingdom size of 10 (eg 2500 rural population). So I'm a bit confused on how that works.
Additionally, What if my PCs want an army of 100 lvl 10 fighters instead of 2000 lvl 3 warriors? How do I cost something like that? What are the loyalty checks to be made? Are there any guidelines around for this?
I think what the rule's intent is, is that you can't recruit an army of kobolds if you killed them all, but you can if you befriended them. As for soldier levels, there's nothing in the rules (even the River Nations rules) about that. In my game's set of rules, I added training time to level an armmy up to where you want them to be, but I'm not sure they work very well. I have some ideas floating around in my head for an entirely new calculation, which abstracts it out more so that for X kingdom size, you can have up to Y CR worth of army distributed however you want (possibly leaving armies as generic martial/arcane/divine/monstrous). Alternatively, you'd have CR points for each of the four types, which would be based on (or capped by) what buildings you have in your kingdom.
So instead of saying "I have an army of 100 fighter 10's", you say "I have a Medium CR 4 martial army". They could be fighters, warriors, barbarians, paladins, rogues, or any combination thereof, and it explicitly doesn't matter.
The current rules make you make decisions about who makes up an army, then tells you "none of that actually matters, except in the very broadest strokes." There's no mechanical difference between an army of 100 human warrior 3's and an army of 100 half-orc barbarian 2's. They're both CR 1 armies. So is one of 50 dwarven paladin 4's. But there's a big difference between them in narrative. So make the armies as generic as the rules do, and then flavor them however you want.
Is it safe to assume that even nations with a Good Alignment can have Royal Assassins?Hi Elizabeth,
I think it safe to safe that it's still fine. :)
Given the (necessary) brevity of the rules - the names given to ruling
positions are not going to fit each group all of the time. They'll just
be generic 'place holder' names. I'm sure that a Royal Assassin could
quite as easily be described as a Spy Master, for example...or even
Royal Jester...if that's what took your fancy...
Or Royal Executioner, or King's Champion...
As for soldier levels, there's nothing in the rules (even the River Nations rules) about that.
Yes, there is. Page 23. Training Armies section. We didn't put a cap on levels, but we did make armies with PC class level 2 weeks/level to train and armies with NPC class levels 1 week/level to train. This makes it impractical for a level 20 group of paladins to be trained during a way. It would take almost a year for them to get that high. By that point, the war might be over.
As for soldier levels, there's nothing in the rules (even the River Nations rules) about that.Yes, there is. Page 23. Training Armies section. We didn't put a cap on levels, but we did make armies with PC class level 2 weeks/level to train and armies with NPC class levels 1 week/level to train. This makes it impractical for a level 20 group of paladins to be trained during a way. It would take almost a year for them to get that high. By that point, the war might be over.
I take it back. I hadn't gone back to double check my sources, and I didn't remember seeing it there. My apologies.
I will point out, though, that this makes NPC-class armies far better than PC-class ones. The only advantage to a PC-class army is +1 CR. After spending a month training 100 fighters, you have a CR 1 army (two PC levels = CR 1), but after a month of training 100 warriors, you have a CR 2 army (4 NPC levels = CR 2). After two months, they're CR 3 and 6 respectively. Same costs. Same time. Same army stats (when they're at the same CR, anyway). But the warriors train much faster.
I will point out, though, that this makes NPC-class armies far better than PC-class ones.
That was intentional. We wanted to provide a mechanical reason why the majority of kingdoms staffed their guards with NPCs instead of PC classed people. They're faster to generate.
This kept the PCs in normal combat special. If a kingdom was staffed with all PC classed people, the players would feel less special. So we wanted to essentially create a disincentive to create PC classed armies. After the war is over, you'd have a significant number of PC classed people with nothing to do. That means a whole lot of adventurers.
This way we figured most nations would spend most of their army funds on NPC units and then create one "signature" PC classed army. You know the Rogue Squadron or the 101st Airborne of their nation.
Well, you do start the kingdom at the beginning of book 2 with 50 BP from the Swordlords. Some random events and quests provide a BP reward as well.
|
|
Sorry to wander away from army stuff...
I've run three tests on the Kingdom Building system. Each time, starting with 50bp (I know that's where we'll start). Unless I've got my rulers set with about +3 straight down the line, I get incredibly slow growth. Someone was saying how big a Kingdom was supposed to be after 36 months, and I couldn't get reasonably successful kingdoms over size 7 or so.
As I'm a player, the only thing I can think is that there must be some pretty massive in-game influxes of resources or something. If this is the case, if someone could just say 'yeah, you get outside boosts', that'd be great. I don't want to know from where.
I'm also more than a little put off by the notion that negative consumption (from excess farmland production) doesn't help the economy, since food is so valued in the River Kingdoms. Yeah, I could create house-rules, but I'm not the GM here, and I'd rather run by the book.
There are some quest rewards that boost some of your kingdom stats and there will be BP rewards as well.
Sorry to wander away from army stuff...
I've run three tests on the Kingdom Building system. Each time, starting with 50bp (I know that's where we'll start). Unless I've got my rulers set with about +3 straight down the line, I get incredibly slow growth. Someone was saying how big a Kingdom was supposed to be after 36 months, and I couldn't get reasonably successful kingdoms over size 7 or so.
As I'm a player, the only thing I can think is that there must be some pretty massive in-game influxes of resources or something. If this is the case, if someone could just say 'yeah, you get outside boosts', that'd be great. I don't want to know from where.
I'm also more than a little put off by the notion that negative consumption (from excess farmland production) doesn't help the economy, since food is so valued in the River Kingdoms. Yeah, I could create house-rules, but I'm not the GM here, and I'd rather run by the book.
I GM my KM campaign. My group really like role playing and they did not optimize their kingdom building methods. I let them make their choices and several resulted in slow build techniques but excellent character builds. What I've done is supplement the BP with bonuses for instance, the diplomat (an NPC) has had several trade agreements with Varnhold and Restov that added bonus BPs; one of the PC is a Garess noble so his family has sent BPs to be used towards specific projects to enhance "former family lands"; there was a marriage proposal that had a BP amount to it; and several other items. Basically, each character has been able to secure a few additioanl BPs from their leadership roles or background information provided. As the GM, I monitored the situation to ensure the game did not slow down too much and the players were still enthralled with the secondary kingdom building role.
|
|
At the 13th month my group has claimed 5 hexes and has 12 city blocks build up. I use houserules that reduce the BP produced by the magi economy. My players even rolled a 1 once in the Economy phase, so they did lost 1 turn of income. I don't see problems with the kingdom growth.
What kind of buildings are you producing in your tests?
The manpower-based alternative rules to army building I put up in the Mass Combat sticky thread. I used JBE's concept of training time with hard caps on class levels for NPC and PC class levels.
NPC training is far faster with a level cap of 4. PC. Training takes quite a bit longer with a level cap of 3. There is or should be a percentage limit of how many non-warrior / non-fighter classed units you can draw upon from your kingom's manpower pool.
I also added in another linit: your nation's officer corps. These are the generals you have educated to lead regiments / armies. At the time of writing, most of the KM campaigns, player groups had Leadership, so the preliminary source of officers are the 2nd - 6th level followers provided by leadership.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
While there is no WRONG way to build a kingdom, a kingdom should set priorities. Spreading resources out to cover all aspects as once means you are spreading the kingdom to thin. Economy should be the primary goal of a kingdom's outset. If the country is not financed, it doesn't exist for long. You can always pay more for Stability and Loyalty when it is needed, but you need money to make that happen. More economy = more options. Its like a fighter with all ability scores at 14, not wrong but not optimal either.
The castle, while a good idea, is far from necessary for a young kingdom. Defense is important, but you are wasting the Unrest reduction since that cannot be saved and you cannot have a negative unrest. Plus the Economy bonus provided a castle is the same as a smith and a weaver, yet the half price castle costs twice as much as those two combined.
The kingdom build system has some quick change up options built in for an emergency that you need to adjust for. Specifically, those are Edits and the kingdom leaders. When you need a stronger focus on economy, shift the PCs over to economy positions and leave the NPCs to staff the Loyalty and Stability positions. When facing a war, shift the PCs over to Loyalty and let the NPCs handle the now stable economy.
I did consider that the castle wasn't the best bang-for-buck, but it seems like the intended opening move. I'll try opening with less expensive stuff.
IMO, the half price castle seems like a test. Its very tempting to start off with that, but if you do, it will hamper your long term growth. Its like buying a really big house straight out of college because you know someday you will be able to afford it and it will be needed for the large run. But that doesn't matter so much if you have to declare bankruptcy because you are living beyond your means.
When you've got 10-15 BP coming in every month, you can easily splurge and repair the castle. It will only take 2-3 months to pay back. But while you have no income, it sinks half your starting capital that could otherwise be used to expand your kingdom.
|
|
I did consider that the castle wasn't the best bang-for-buck, but it seems like the intended opening move. I'll try opening with less expensive stuff.IMO, the half price castle seems like a test. Its very tempting to start off with that, but if you do, it will hamper your long term growth. Its like buying a really big house straight out of college because you know someday you will be able to afford it and it will be needed for the large run. But that doesn't matter so much if you have to declare bankruptcy because you are living beyond your means.
When you've got 10-15 BP coming in every month, you can easily splurge and repair the castle. It will only take 2-3 months to pay back. But while you have no income, it sinks half your starting capital that could otherwise be used to expand your kingdom.
Hmm good to know as I believe my pcs will want to do.
|
|
Ignoring Stability and Loyalty, working strictly on Economy, with Rulers and the Spymaster focused on Economy unless Unrest started to rise, (and NOT buying the Castle first-off), I grew my test kingdom to size 16 in 30 months.
I should note that while I had no focus on Stability/Loyalty, I inevitably bought buildings that brought Stability up to a point where rolls were made about 50% of the time.
I tried to make cities that were reasonable.
The First city: Mill, Pier, Apiery, Butcher, Brothel, Shop, 2 houses, Smith, Witch Hut, Fletcher, Tanner, Dump.
The Second city, just starting: Mill, Brothel, House, Witch Hut.
This all puts me just a few months away from size 21, where Ruler's abilities would start affecting a second category (probably Stability in this case). Income is about 8 or 9 average, and magic items have been producing another 5 or so on average.
This is light years ahead of my first 3 test runs, and I had LONG strings of bad event rolls (4 plagues, and insanely frequent Monster/Bandit attacks)you're still not taking into consideration the quest awards that will give the kingdom some boosts in BP and stats.
So... there ya go...
Hi all, first post on the Pathfinder forums. My group recently started playing a kingmaker campaign. I know our DM is house-ruling some things, and I see a possible issue. I'm a bit of a rules lawyer though and don't want to question my DM if I'm just off-base here or misunderstanding.
By normal rules, do farms take multiple months to build? I ask because I can't find anything about how long farms take to build, implying that rules for it don't exist. my group started its kingdom in hills, where it costs 4 BP to build a farm. It takes one month per BP to build farms. Therefore, each farm will take 4 months to build.
My concern comes into play with consumption. Claiming the hex for a farm raises consumption by 1, and it will be 4 months until it starts to pay off consumption. So far we have three hexes (city, one where we started a farm, and another we just claimed (with intent of making it a farm). That puts our consumption at 4 (3 hexes + 1 city district) per month before edicts (my group chose token promotion and 1 festival, which i'm going to have to convince them to get rid of until we have some farms established). if we keep on adding hexes our consumption will soon be at a point where we won't be able to afford it with our monthly economy, and i don't want to dip into our small treasury spending BP on consumption that could be buying us buildings.
do we just need to slow down, wait 4 months for our first two farms to build, and then proceed slowly? we're not being very ambitious, just trying to build a road to Oleg's with farmland along it. it seems a little off that such a simple endeavor would be so difficult to accomplish (and afford) in about 6 months of game time. do i just need to adjust my expectations and start suffering phases where we do nothing? my group is already pretty "meh" about Kingmaker and I don't see them being especially patient with things taking forever. is my DM making things unnecessarily difficult on us?
thanks for any input.
It sounds like your GM wants to stretch out the campaign from less than a decade to several decades in game time. One way to do that is with the "one month per BP cost to build it" house-rule. I would recommend talking to the GM on the side about it. If the rest of the players are "meh", I would remind him that there is a "kingdom in the background" option for the campaign.
Another option is, if you're the one running the mechanical facet of the kingdom, to "pre-do" several years to a decade once the GM provides the house-ruled modifications to the kingdom rules. Do this away from the table so that the rest of the grumpystiltskins can get on with killing things and taking their stuff.
Hi, anyone is using the university building?
Its half cost bonus does brek the games in your experience? And does it stack with other buildings cutting the BP price in half?
Taxation as an "All or None" proposition always seemed a bit weird to me.
Without trying to make it too easy on the players, would it seem logical that a roll failed by less than 5 or 10 would generate partial taxes?
Thus, a first turn Kingdom with a Size of 21 -- a roll of 18 would normally generate no taxation.
I propose allowing 1/10 (rounded down) of the taxes still be collected, so a roll of 18 would add 1 to the treasury in the above example.
Extrapolating out to Size 45 ... any successful roll will generate at least 9 BP, but by then Farms should handle most of the consumption (hopefully). If the group rolled a total of 42 they would still generate 4BP.
To counter-act the more forgiving nature of this system, a roll failed by an excessive amount should generate Unrest (and Citizens dumping Tea into the Tuskwater as a symbol of their discontent).
|
|
We have changed some number but we are using that table, so far it work well but we have played only 15 months of the kingdom, all under normal taxation, so it is a limited test.
So far there was only a timid suggestion to go for a lighter tax rate, but the suggestion was rejected as they need the money to build up the kingdom.
|
I've almost got the basics figured out. I'm the city planner in my campaign and want to know about the BP generated by PC gp/item donation.
only concerning items worth < 4,000gp.
If an item is sold regularly, it is so at half base value i think (might be RAW, might be houserule. i don't remember).
If this item is instead donated to the city treasury, is the BP generated equal to base value or does it suffer the half penalty as well.
example:
I have 2 +1 weapons i have found and want to donate to the city to increase its BP (assume that a shop keep takes them, sells, them, and spends the money in the city and the BP is a result of the city economical workings). +1 weapon is a 2,000 gp base value. would the 2 I donate grant a BP (4,000 combined base worth), or would I need to donate 4 +1 weapons to get the 1 BP (8,000 base value, half price for "selling")
Nez: 2 +1 weapons in this case = 1 BP.
|
|
I think in terms of the whole forest/water hex thing, I'm going to have
a single building valued the same in all respects.
It'll be a 'farm/forestry/fishery' depending on how the players purpose it.
Any comments?
biggest required sustainable resource for any population is food. farms are 2BP minus to consumption, but a flavor fishery generates the same product so I'd rule it the same. forests are harder to manage with clear cutting, replanting, harder labor needing more food to keep workers going, detracts time from other production duties...so I believe forests are a -1 consumption if memory serves.
i'm tired and may not get the question.
|
|
Resources: Resources include particularly valuable sources of lumber, metal, gems, food, or the like. A resource hex increases a kingdom’s Economy by 1.
Camp: (6 BP) A logging camp can be build in a forest area with a road or river. +1 Economy, +1 Stability. The economy bonus is doubled if the hex contains a resource like rare lumber: +2 Economy, +2 Stability.
Mine: (6 BP) A mine is used for recovering valuable or less valuables minerals, ores and gems. A mine can be built in hills or mountains if a road or river is present. +1 Economy, +1 Stability. The economy bonus is doubled if the hex contains a resource like gold or silver ore: +2 Economy, +2 Stability.
Building a camp in a water hex for fish is perfectly within the rules. It gives rare lumber as an example, but it isn't limited to that. Paizo flushes out another example in the mine which offers the same bonuses, just with ore instead of lumber. For a water hex with fish, I'd use:
Fishery: (6 BP) A fishery can be built in a hex that contains large bodies of water (big rivers, lakes, coastline, etc). +1 Economy, +1 Stability. The economy bonus is doubled if the hex contains a resource like abundant or rare fish: +2 Economy, + 2 Stability.
The Jon Brazer guide: Book of the River Nations takes some liberties with the core rules from RRR and gives some additional options to kingdom customization.
The Jon Brazer guide: Book of the River Nations: Complete Player's Reference for Kingdom Building takes some liberties with the core rules from RRR and gives some additional options to kingdom customization.
I'm not sure if "liberties" is a fair description. We did incorporate known errata and expanded on the existing rules. Like Nazthalak mentioned we did include additional options instead of limiting players to farms but most of that was developed by Jason Nelson, used with his permission. We also added castle customization options, but they are more of a minor addition when compared to ways to develop the open landscape of your kingdom. You can find the Book of the River Nations: Complete Player's Reference for Kingdom Building right here on Paizo's site, and note the SEVEN 5-Star reviews its been given.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Didn't mean it to have a negative sound to it. I apologize for it coming across that way. I only meant to say that the Brazer guide is comprehensive of what has been expanded out beyond what is laid out solely in the RRR book, which is where the core mechanics for the kingdom rules are.
The guide does an excellent job condensing and clarifying the kingdom building processes. Additionally, the inclusion of known errata and the work of Mr. Nelson is quite handy.
I did enjoy the castle additions and open landscape stuff. I try to run a lot of things by core rules (with admitted errata), so seeing additional things is always nice, but not always incorporated into our games.
I own it, and I will attest that it is a very valuable aid (worth of 5 stars indeed) and I encourage anyone playing Kingmaker to invest in it.
|
|
Didn't mean it to have a negative sound to it. I apologize for it coming across that way. I only meant to say that the Brazer guide is comprehensive of what has been expanded out beyond what is laid out solely in the RRR book, which is where the core mechanics for the kingdom rules are.
The guide does an excellent job condensing and clarifying the kingdom building processes. Additionally, the inclusion of known errata and the work of Mr. Nelson is quite handy.
I did enjoy the castle additions and open landscape stuff. I try to run a lot of things by core rules (with admitted errata), so seeing additional things is always nice, but not always incorporated into our games.
I own it, and I will attest that it is a very valuable aid (worth of 5 stars indeed) and I encourage anyone playing Kingmaker to invest in it.
Ditto! I would strongly endorse it also!
I would recomend doing away with magic item rolls on each kingdom turn, later in the AP when you have many rolls its a tediously boring thing.