Each Player controlling a kingdom

[Beardsmith]

I have been toying with this idea for a game with some friends of mine. I am sure I am not the only one but I was wondering if anyone else had any thoughts as to if the Kingdom building rules would do well for a game in which players are controlling a kingdom instead of just one character. I looked around the forums to see if anyone else has tried this or had thoughts but didnt really find anything.

Does anyone have any suggestions?

Would you suggest another rule set for this?

Thanks in advance!

[Lincoln Hills]

What I'd probably advise is having one character run the kingdom (using those rules) while others design the biggest organizations - guilds, temple networks, arcane academies - within that kingdom (using the organization rules). It's the way the old AD&D Birthright setting handled things, and it can lead to more give-and-take and in-party politics than a set of allied realms. (Not to mention that players won't be tempted to steal land or pick fights with other PCs' kingdoms.)

[Spook205]

Sounds like a new take on birthright. Honestly, I think this might work out well. Make some small countries, play up the relationships between the players' kingdoms as being old and established, maybe rulers over parts of a fallen kingdom. I'm half tempted to point you at Shadow Skill for stuff like this. Four kingdoms who protect and serve the Holy Kingdom in the middle of them, in a loose confederation of countries (with a mutual destruction agreement if someone steps out of line he gets dogpiled by the others).

Maybe have an old 'center' of the kingdom, or have it over run or something.

Mechanically I think the kingdom building rules will work, but you're going to want to keep a way for the group to go and do stuff.
You're going to want to keep a buffer between them of a few hexes, maybe even some choice ones and make adventures be who gets to claim the area (this might create a bit of hostility though).

Keep in mind the old birthright stuff generally was meant as quasi-competitive. If you find the old birthright playtest notes, you'll see.

[Wrong John Silver]

Definitely Birthright is what you can mine for ideas. It was a 2e D&D campaign world, with a couple of 3e ports available.

Basically the PCs contain blood of the old dead gods, which give them a few extra powers, but more importantly, give them the right to rule. It's not just kingdoms; characters can control guilds, temples, magical sources of power, that sort of thing.

I loved Birthright back in the day, and would love a chance to rebuild it into a game again.

[Lincoln Hills]

Funny it should be brought up. Just a couple months back, when my players gained a certain plane-hopping device in Reign of Winter, I decided Cerilia would make a more interesting trip than the original destination Paizo wrote. (The Vos regions have just the right flavor for Baba Yaga.) I dusted off the box and unfolded those very pretty maps. None of my players knew anything about Birthright, so it's all new and interesting for them.

[Propsken]

Running a single kingdom takes anywhere from (iirc) 11 to 13 characters and/or NPCs taking up kingdom-ruling roles; not having certain roles filled results in penalties. Having multiple kingdoms running is going to require either a freaking truckload of NPC's, or simplifying those roles to a single stat. It will also take ages both in and out of game to finish up a kingdom-building turn, and then we're not even mentioning the bookkeeping and numbercrunching - I hope you have some of those super-handy-dandy kingdom sheet spreadsheets floating about the interwebz available. Maybe consider reducing or chucking out the kingom events. Same with the magic item creation; don't bother with the minors and assume they get sold or something.
In short: you'll have to implify a few things to keep everything flowing.
Other than that, watch our for Sid Meyer. He might sue.

[Gregory Connolly]

It can be really cool. But this is a high level campaign. Without the feat Leadership the players are going to be leaving too much to GM fiat to make using the rules worthwhile. You are also going to be spending half of forever on kingdom upkeep, so work out a system for doing this between sessions or as quickly as possible. I ran Kingmaker and that was the biggest complaint from every single player, running a kingdom is complicated and takes too long.

[Beardsmith]

I was honestly thinking of it being more of a realm management game instead of each player having one character. Basically they would be in charge of multiple characters and roleplay them as needed. When they aren't needed they are just "doing their job"

Kinda my thoughts.

[Chemlak]

Propsken wrote:

I hope you have some of those super-handy-dandy kingdom sheet spreadsheets floating about the interwebz available.

You mean like this one?

Edit: Oops, wrong link first time.

[Wrong John Silver]

Beardsmith wrote:

I was honestly thinking of it being more of a realm management game instead of each player having one character. Basically they would be in charge of multiple characters and roleplay them as needed. When they aren't needed they are just "doing their job"

Kinda my thoughts.

Birthright, Birthright, Birthright. That's the game for you.

Birthright.net