|
I was just browsing the classes looking for inspiration and noticed the aristocrat class for NPC rulers and it got me thinking there's the noble scion for an heir to a noble house and a third party suppliment royal for magically touched heirs. However these are all mainly plot hooks from low level and I was wondering would you do anything mechanically to a character sheet if a player at higher level got made a noble as reward for services or founded a kingdom becoming a ruler in their own right or would you just leave it all on the roleplaying rather than rollplaying side?
So, the Kingmaker AP has some of this built in. But in general, IMO, when a character becomes King (Etc), they have reached the pinnacle of their adventuring career and it's time for the player to start a new character, with the Old PC now effectively being an NPC.
|
Pathfinder Society 1E had some vanity boons and chronicle boons that allowed characters to acquire noble titles, and in some cases, increase their noble rank (to earl or margrave at best, IIRC?). The mechanical benefits varied, from bonuses to influence NPCs in your home kingdom, to small bonuses to skills such as Knowledge (nobility), to owning land that allowed you to use Knowledge (nobility) or Diplomacy for day job checks.
Some small boons can be appropriate and others have already mentioned some examples. But the main thing from my perspective is that whatever it does shouldn't increase combat capabilities in any way.
|
I was just browsing the classes looking for inspiration and noticed the aristocrat class for NPC rulers and it got me thinking there's the noble scion for an heir to a noble house and a third party suppliment royal for magically touched heirs. However these are all mainly plot hooks from low level and I was wondering would you do anything mechanically to a character sheet if a player at higher level got made a noble as reward for services or founded a kingdom becoming a ruler in their own right or would you just leave it all on the roleplaying rather than rollplaying side?
Maybe something along the lines of:
Uneasy lies the head that wears a crown (Ex): At the start of each adventure, make a Responsibility check by rolling 1d20 with a target of your character's levelSuccess: All is well in your kingdom (or at least handleable by your deputies) and you can adventure freely. Trouble is always brewing, however, so add a stacking -1 penalty to your next Responsibility check.
Failure: Something in your kingdom demands your personal attention, forcing you to choose between adventure or dealing with the issue.
If you choose to adventure
- If do not already have the [Neglectful Ruler] condition, you gain the [Neglectful Ruler] condition and add a stacking -1 penalty to your next Responsibility check.
- If you already have the [Neglectful Ruler] condition, you are deposed in some fashion for neglecting your duties.
- If you do not have the [Neglectful Ruler] condition, you reset the Responsibility check penalty to -0 (you showed up when you were actually needed).
- If you have the [Neglectful Ruler] condition, you lose the [Neglectful Ruler] condition instead (you didn't show up when first needed, but you got there eventually, so you can continue to rule for the moment).
Note that the [Neglectful Ruler] condition has no mechanical impact outside of the Responsibility check (unless the GM decides otherwise).
I'm of the opinion generally that when PCs attain certain levels of terrestrial or cosmic power, it's most appropriate that they retire and become NPCs or background characters.
Like no nation would want their King or Queen to go into the dungeon and fight a lich- other less irreplaceable people can do that instead.
Give them access to the feat leadership. To me this feat should only be taken by a character that is in a position of power. This does not necessarily have to be running a kingdom. It could easily be a religious or business position. Any noble or other person in a position of power is going to need people to help running things. Leadership gives you a group of LOYAL followers. Without the feat the people you hire are just as likely to further their own interests as yours.
The followers gained by the feat are those you know you can count on.
I don't know that anything needs to be added to a ruling character's sheet by default.
I think the GM should, however, pay attention to what is or isn't already on said character's sheet, how those abilities, skills, and feats apply to ruling, and how their presence or absence could affect the realm's stability.
To put it more directly, a Fighter without any ranks in Diplomacy or any Knowledge skills will have to rely on advisors and ministers to lend expertise to his rule. A Fighter who doesn't have the Leadership feat, either, will have to rely on force of personality to keep them in line. A Fighter who tanked his Charisma will have to keep them loyal through force, coin, or some other means.
As an aside, I don't think becoming a ruler requires a character to be "retired." I think it's more a case of the nature and scope of the PC's adventures (and, by extension, those of the party as a whole) changing. But yes, to echo the thoughts of other posters in this thread, the PC's activities could also have a profound effect on how the masses view their ruler. As long as governance remains just and stable, the PC's heroics could make the people happier and more loyal.
Instead of making rulership the capstone event, you could actually start the players out with it. Do a big home brew adventure where the players have to consolidate power and grow their domain. You could give each one their own country, but make it so they need to help each other in their kingdom quests. Also make sure the players know that neighboring empires would quickly move in if they begin to squabble amongst themselves.
If I were to do such a project, I would give the characters custom regalia to help them rule properly. Still thinking about that…
How do you treat NPC rulers in your campaign? Do they gain special powers from becoming a ruler? If the campaign has the rulers gaining abilities for being a ruler the players should gain the same or similar power. Most campaigns don’t give rulers any special powers, so the PC that becomes a ruler should not gain anything. I could see if the campaign used some sort of divine right for the rulers, they might gain some powers.
If I ever get to run Kingmaker, I'll have the PCs help found a kingdom but most of the requisite positions of power like King or Sheriff will go to the various NPCs you come across in the AP. Some of the positions like Warden could be held by a pc but not a king or something that needs to stay and/or be available to the people.
The Crown.
Though worn on the head, the Crown does not take up a body slot. Rather, it adds ornamentation to whatever headgear is worn. Naturally, it can be worn alone if desired.
When worn the Crown provides a +1 stackable bonus to AC. The Crown also provides a +2 bonus to the ability of the wearer’s choice. The bonus can be shifted to any other ability through concentration. (A move action.)
|
|
How do you treat NPC rulers in your campaign? Do they gain special powers from becoming a ruler? If the campaign has the rulers gaining abilities for being a ruler the players should gain the same or similar power. Most campaigns don’t give rulers any special powers, so the PC that becomes a ruler should not gain anything. I could see if the campaign used some sort of divine right for the rulers, they might gain some powers.
In the past I've used an alternate rule set that gave players powers related to their kingdom. Basically a ruler was linked to their land so they could sense when things where wrong and other benefits/drawbacks. However when I went to take a look at them they'd been corrupted by one of the computer crashes I had before starting to back things up externally. So looking forward I figured I'd see what other people do these days.
Ever read the old AD&D Birthright campaign? In that the rulers have a touch of divinity and gain powers based on their rulership score. The score is based on the quantity of people ruled and their quality of life. Conversely problems in the realm can result in issues reflected on the body of the ruler.