As a huge fan of kingdom building and coming from an extensive Birthright background. That being said after looking at the Kingdom Building rules I came up with several adjustments that I am considering and would like to see implemented. My campaign is planned to take along time and span several modules (see my CoCT / Kingmaker mash-up thread in General Discussion) so I don't think my adjustments will hurt my players in the long run but I want to see what the community thinks about how the adjustments will impact the game.
1. Feudalism (Or Multiple Kingdoms)
I don't know if this will become an issue but knowing my players it ma come down to them wanting to maintain multiple kingdoms amongst the party. I doubt they could even settle or agree on which one of them would "rule" so I am excited to see how that shapes up. This will also effect the charter as the 'Nation' will be "required" to offer taxes to Restov as their "Sovereign" nation. That being said, the following idea is what I am considering:
Any attempts at splitting a nation into smaller ones will result in completely separate kingdoms per the rules. Any additional agreements reached by the rulers will be "binding" as far as laws go, but are not actually required to follow through on the agreement. There will probably need to be a check as the nation is aware of their "Sovereignty" and not upholding bargains can lead to war which causes the commoner a number of problems.
2. Cutting the Bonuses
I have seen several threads talking about how bonuses get out of control and most checks become auto-successes unless a 1 is rolled. I do not want to see that happening and therefore propose the following:
I am leaving all bonuses granted by ability scores because of leadership roles alone. Bonuses applied by Buildings and Alignment are going to be cut in half. In the case of +1 bonuses it will require 2 buildings of that type to apply the bonus.
I think this rule will keep the bonuses from getting out of hand but still leave the Kingdom sustainable.
3. Removing the Magic Item Economy
I am not sure what to do about this. I don't like the amount of "items" that a kingdom can rack up as I tend to run my games fairly "magic lite" as much as I can. I also don't like the idea of the characters being able to claim items that are well beyond their level. It is to much temptation and I want to cut it out. Due to the amount of modules I am running there will be plenty of "surplus" items to give them bonuses by selling them.
My idea is to use the "city value" as a bonus to BP. So each city built to max value gives a +4 BP (16,000 gp). This is personally my favorite idea, the Economy bonus is still lower but more sustainable. Obviously the PCs can sell their own magical item excess.
4. Slowed Building Rate
This adds a bit more realism without actively penalizing the kingdom because the bonuses are coming just not immediately. A building taking up multiple city blocks takes longer to build (# of City Blocks = # of months to build). This rule is effected by my next rule.
5. Seasonal Turns
This is one that I take from the Birthright rules. A turn in Birthright is actually 3 months long, and you get 3 actions during that turn but a single event happens during these turns. I am considering having the Kingdom "shut down" for winter, so there is really only 9 actions a year instead of 12. Everything will probably be tripled in the varies phases as if there had been multiple months of turns. Basically every "Turn" will be doing 3 months at once.
I'm guessing you are posting these online because you want us to comment/feedback.
2. Cutting the Bonuses
I have seen several threads talking about how bonuses get out of control and most checks become auto-successes unless a 1 is rolled. I do not want to see that happening and therefore propose the following:I am leaving all bonuses granted by ability scores because of leadership roles alone. Bonuses applied by Buildings and Alignment are going to be cut in half. In the case of +1 bonuses it will require 2 buildings of that type to apply the bonus.
I think this rule will keep the bonuses from getting out of hand but still leave the Kingdom sustainable.
I think this is a terrible idea.
Let's look at *why* bonuses spiral out of control before we make rules to limit their growth.
- PCs can control the size of their bonuses. Namely, by making more buildings.
- PCs can control the size of their Command DC. Namely, by not claiming hexes.
If the PCs are building buildings and claiming hexes at roughly the same pace, then they will be in the "sweet spot" as far as "there is a chance of failure." As GMs, this is where we want them to be.
However, there is nothing preventing the PCs from stalling on claiming hexes and instead investing in building creation. Once the buildings have gotten "far enough ahead" of hex-claims, then the PCs may move forward and do both. So long as they keep buildings ahead of hexes, they will sit firmly in "auto succeed" territory.
There is no "need" in the campaign to claim hexes. At least, there's no need to claim them quickly. Your houserules do nothing to change that.
You've slowed down the rate at which the in-game timer will pass. But the problem otherwise remains exactly the same.
---
FWIW, in my game, I've explicitly tied leveling up to kingdom size. My PCs have more than enough XP to reach level 8, but I've told them explicitly OOG that they cannot level up until they get 26 hexes. "The King is the Land and the Land is the King" or somesuch lore.
I've also made it so that resource points fufill the mechanical role that magic shops do. (Seriously, having a gold mine give +1 Econ is just sad: the act of claiming it raises the DC by the same!) So there's a reason to want to claim hexes.
|
However, there is nothing preventing the PCs from stalling on claiming hexes and instead investing in building creation. Once the buildings have gotten "far enough ahead" of hex-claims, then the PCs may move forward and do both. So long as they keep buildings ahead of hexes, they will sit firmly in "auto succeed" territory.
There is no "need" in the campaign to claim hexes. At least, there's no need to claim them quickly. Your houserules do nothing to change that.
You've slowed down the rate at which the in-game timer will pass. But the problem otherwise remains exactly the same.
You know I don't think I've realized this until now....there really is NO reason to claim hexes, is there. Just build a huge metropolis city-state and i believe you can be just as powerful. But that's just off the top of my head looking back....i'm sure someone will come along and prove otherwise. Right now my players are claiming hexes.
|
You know I don't think I've realized this until now....there really is NO reason to claim hexes, is there. Just build a huge metropolis city-state and i believe you can be just as powerful. But that's just off the top of my head looking back....i'm sure someone will come along and prove otherwise. Right now my players are claiming hexes.However, there is nothing preventing the PCs from stalling on claiming hexes and instead investing in building creation. Once the buildings have gotten "far enough ahead" of hex-claims, then the PCs may move forward and do both. So long as they keep buildings ahead of hexes, they will sit firmly in "auto succeed" territory.
There is no "need" in the campaign to claim hexes. At least, there's no need to claim them quickly. Your houserules do nothing to change that.
You've slowed down the rate at which the in-game timer will pass. But the problem otherwise remains exactly the same.
I guess you can say that there has to be people and land supporting all those people in the cities. Farms and ranches and such are needed to support the them. I'm going to say that to my group.
You know I don't think I've realized this until now....there really is NO reason to claim hexes, is there. Just build a huge metropolis city-state and i believe you can be just as powerful. But that's just off the top of my head looking back....i'm sure someone will come along and prove otherwise. Right now my players are claiming hexes.
The biggest reason to claim hexes is the plot hook for the campaign: we're here to settle and claim the Stolen Lands. So, in theory, your PCs are all types that would naturally have a drive to do this. Much like most PCs have the innate drive to "adventure."
Otherwise, the only real mechanical reason is that by having very few hexes, you create a single point of failure. This is problematic in three specific instances:
- if you roll the "plague" event on the random events table
- if an enemy army moves on to your city
- when the Nightmare Rook Bloom occurs in Book 6
But yes, I agree, the kingdom-building-mini-game gives no incentive to expand, but rather a strong DIS-incentive. Which is sad. Hence, my two houserules. Also known as "carrot" (find gold mines!) and "stick" (you can't level!).
|
|
You know I don't think I've realized this until now....there really is NO reason to claim hexes, is there. Just build a huge metropolis city-state and i believe you can be just as powerful. But that's just off the top of my head looking back....i'm sure someone will come along and prove otherwise. Right now my players are claiming hexes.The biggest reason to claim hexes is the plot hook for the campaign: we're here to settle and claim the Stolen Lands. So, in theory, your PCs are all types that would naturally have a drive to do this. Much like most PCs have the innate drive to "adventure."
Otherwise, the only real mechanical reason is that by having very few hexes, you create a single point of failure. This is problematic in three specific instances:
- if you roll the "plague" event on the random events table
- if an enemy army moves on to your city
- when the Nightmare Rook Bloom occurs in Book 6But yes, I agree, the kingdom-building-mini-game gives no incentive to expand, but rather a strong DIS-incentive. Which is sad. Hence, my two houserules. Also known as "carrot" (find gold mines!) and "stick" (you can't level!).
lol!
|
FWIW, I've added an 'in-game' reason to expand the kingdoms size instead of hinging it on character level - though there is a little of that, too in my game.
I have added other societies/communities/civilizations etc to the mix that claim hexes as well - albeit slower pace.
However this has incentivized the players to act judiciously, choose the important hexes and expand if for no other reason than to deny them to others.
There is an elven barony now that established in the keep that the fey were in.
I placed an ancient dwarven keep that down at the south border along the forest near where the PCs meet Mangut.
I placed a hobbit village that sprung up near the moon-radishes.
Harlguka's lair also, as i've been following that thread about his kingdom,
Sootscale Tribe as well have the Silver Mine, and two other hexes NE along the river including Nettles Crossing. This puts them in prime position to control the water ways tax travel and commerce to and from Brevoy etc. Thanks to the PCs allied kingdom, the kobolds have learned the faith of Abadar, and really took the commerce teachings to heart.
All but Harlgukas are allies of the PCs who have done things to help out the kingdoms. So eventually they can unite as one in theory; but that remains to be seen. ALot will depend on the PCs plans, and how they wish to proceed and diplomacie foreign relations.
I've also introduced Maegar Varn and Varnhold early on. It's a thriving nation right now. They are at constant war w/ the centaurs, but they have no taxation issues from kobolds or others to have direct routes to Restov.
Robert