Best way to handle stronghold/domain rules

[ferratus]

I dearly miss the rules for managing a domain, using henchmen and sages, and building a stronghold. I am unsatisfied with rules given in 3e for running a stronghold, as it seemed to be largely vanity to spend money on strongholds when you could be spending that money on magical items that keep you alive in the hack and slash of the DM's dungeons. I also really disliked the rules for getting followers, because you had one follower who doubled your power, and 100 followers who were of no use to you.

In prior editions to 3e you gained a stronghold and a domain as part of leveling up. However, If you have an adventure path in which the story doesn't allow for time to stop and build a castle, the rules rather get in the way. There was also the problem that some followers were better than others, but that's neither here nor there.

However, I think I have a solution to this problem. Treat strongholds, followers and domains alike as treasure instead of as a class/level ability or a feat. If you do a stronghold as treasure, the DM can give the players a stronghold or a title if it fits the campaign. The domain can produce income for the players and be a source of plot hooks.

For the treasure value of the stronghold itself I wouldn't value it based on its size or on its materials as it has been traditionally done. Instead, I would value it based on the components of a keep. Each component of the keep could be given as treasure, or the PC's could build one for its value.

You could imagine each class having a piece of the stronghold to call their own, with assistants to help with rituals, minor tasks, and domain management. In addition each class would gain a mechanical benefit for having that stronghold component equal to what a wondrous magical item would grant. It is hard to justify building a stronghold when you can buy magical items, when the magic items will be the things which you use in the dungeon to help you along or keep you alive.

Types of Stronghold Components

• Dungeon – Warlock
• College - Bard
• Tower - Wizard
• Gymnasium – Fighter
• Barracks - Warlord
  ​
• Hideout – Rogues
• Waystation - Ranger
• ? – Avengers
• Temple – Clerics
• Abbey - Paladins
• Lyceum - Invokers
• Grove – Druid
• Lodge – Barbarian
• Ancestral Totem - Shaman
• Hermitage - Warden

I haven't been able to match up all the classes with a stronghold component, and I'm not happy with a couple of the "homes" for a particular class on the list, but you can certainly imagine the capabilities that each of these components to attract appropriate followers and grant a mechanical benefit that the player can take with him outside the stronghold.

For example, A warlock would be interested in a "dungeon" stronghold component which grants the services of a bound devil or attracts monstrous humanoids. A rogue would be interested in a "hideout" stronghold component which grants income and rogue followers such as a spy who would provide him with information (reroll streetwise checks), a fence to sell stolen magical items for more than 1/5, or a smuggler which gives him access to black market poisons. A wizard could gain a library and apprentices to help him with knowledge checks or grant a bonus to rituals. A cleric on the other hand could have a chapel that contains a relic (like the demihuman relics from Rules Cyclopedia) and acolytes who serve him as the wizard's apprentices serve her.

Why is it important that the stronghold components grant a mechanical advantage useful outside the stronghold? It is not strictly necessary, but partly it is to avoid penalizing players who could be buying magical items, and partly it is to encourage reinvestment in the stronghold and encourage interaction with inhabitants of the stronghold.

I'm largely looking for ideas to elaborate this approach to stronghold rules, and perhaps some criticism or some drawbacks to approaching strongholds in this way.

 

[Khuxan]

I like what you've brainstormed so far. I think the best way to treat it is an artifact: when you do related things, your stronghold improves. I like the artifact system because it's outside the level system, it rewards PCs for wise management and it gives PCs a motivation to adventure.

I jotted down some very basic ideas related to strongholds-as-artifacts here: Strongholds - 4E "Classic" - General - Necromancer Games - Message Board - Yuku

 

[ferratus]

There would of course also be general stronghold components which would either come with the default keep (kitchen, living quarters, etc) and components which could be purchased regardless of class (armory, barracks, servant's quarters).

I would also imagine that creating a stronghold space for someone not of your class would be a good way to associate with a hireling. For example, if your party's ritual caster isn't trained in the heal skill, an chapel can be purchased with an NPC cleric attached to remove disease for you.

 

[ferratus]

I like what you've brainstormed so far. I think the best way to treat it is an artifact: when you do related things, your stronghold improves. I like the artifact system because it's outside the level system, it rewards PCs for wise management and it gives PCs a motivation to adventure.

I was thinking that the stronghold would improve by simple reinvestment, but you are right, you should be able to gain favor with your domain/stronghold like you receive favour from a artifact. If you go up in levels for instance, your stronghold's chapel of the cleric character could become a full blown seat of an ecclesiastical authority or your reliquary a pilgrimage site, with resulting benefits.

I also think there could be some room for making decisions to improve your followers or your domain. You could spend "level actions" in which you direct your followers to concentrate on specific tasks. For example, if you want your guardsmen to be elite, you would direct them to train. If you wanted your domain to be secure, you'd set them to patrol. It would be especially interesting if it is advantageous to certain classes if certain choices were chosen over others. Perhaps the rogue character wants his domain a little bandit ridden and his guards to look the other way for example.

 

[Tinker Gnome]

When I was a player and had followers and a stronghold, it was treated mostly as a story element. The missions my group did still mostly called for us to go into a dungeon or other such place where taking followers was impractical. I could use them to run errands or other minor things, but I had no major control over them. The stronghold was just a place to live in.

 

[Sordath]

I would strongly recommend getting hold of the Birthright AD&D setting. There were some nice usable domain rules in there which could port easily over to 4E.

 

[ferratus]

I would strongly recommend getting hold of the Birthright AD&D setting. There were some nice usable domain rules in there which could port easily over to 4E.

I've been looking over some of the birthright stuff, though I definitely am not going to go in as much depth about how to run a domain as these rules did. Largely the domain is going to be able to defend and run itself, because I don't want domain rules to sidetrack the adventure path of the DM. It will be something you do between levels, rather than the core of the play experience. So I won't bother with maintenance costs, or conquering other territories, moving troops around, and raising and lowering taxes.

 

[Kerrick]

I think this is a fantastic idea. I'd love to see something like this done for 3E/3.5, but I could easily adapt the rules for it myself. One minor quibble:

I also really disliked the rules for getting followers, because you had one follower who doubled your power, and 100 followers who were of no use to you.

Those other 100 followers are effectively henchmen and hirelings - guardsmen, apprentices, servants, and whatnot. They're not really intended to come along on adventures.

I haven't been able to match up all the classes with a stronghold component, and I'm not happy with a couple of the "homes" for a particular class on the list, but you can certainly imagine the capabilities that each of these components to attract appropriate followers and grant a mechanical benefit that the player can take with him outside the stronghold.

This reminds me a lot of player houses in Oblivion. I don't know if you play/are familiar with it, but a lot of player-made mods have things like alchemy rooms/stations (places where you can make potions, which often have automated ingredient sorters, chests for storage, etc.), training rooms for fighters, a room with pickable locks for thieves to train, etc.; many have some or all of these components, as players can advance in multiple paths at once, and the house is designed for a generic character instead of a mage, fighter, thief, or assassin-type.

Having the stronghold grant mechanical bonuses is a really cool idea - it's something more than "a place to store your stuff", which is what most houses in Oblivion end up being.

As far as developing/building the stronghold... I would say the player would have to choose a site and build something from scratch, or find something suitable and "fix it up" himself. The first option would cost a bit more, but enable greater customization (i.e. better bonuses and possibly easier advancement); the second, obviously, would be cheaper but more difficult to customize.

There should be some way to integrate this with the follower/henchman rules (I revised those for my 3.75 system, but I don't know how well they'd port over to 4E); maybe improvements to the followers (either more followers, or better ones) can result in improvements to the stronghold. Or, like you said, "level actions" (did you make that up?) related to Leadership, reputation, and character level - as you gain in status, you can do more with your domain. You can make it modular, so that groups who aren't really interested in running a domain can go off adventuring and let the followers "mind the store", while others interested in politics and intrigue can play at being a lord.

 

[Zog]

I wonder if these ideas could be stretched in a manner similiar to Birthright to create Paragon Paths or Epic Destinies. ie- 'King of Thieves' 'Overlord' etc.

And some of the requirements for the path would be investing in your domain, and the powers would be more affective or varingly Effective based on the size/quality or Investiture in the given Domain.

It is a Very mechanical answer.


A much more Fluff side would be to simply start the PCs as tied to some sort of domain, and their power and abilities flow from their domain. It is the source of their power, and the Reason they are different. As they level up, work improvements / growth / change in the Domains as part of the story and part of the adventure. - Drive out the monsters, defeat the bandits, deal with spies & intrigues from nearby domains, etc. So, while there is a connection between the Domain and the PCs - it is not a rigidly, rules oriented and defined one. but a DM controlled, hand-waving one. Requires PCs to trust their DM.

In fact, as yet another spin, you could probably tie leveling to successful adventure completion, which would be successful improvements to the Domain. And attacks or setbacks, if not dealt with, could threaten to decrease the power of the PCs - EVENTUALLY. Ie, once powered up, they have access to that power for a while, even if the action (new town founded!) is nullified (town eaten by giant carnivorous rabbits!). And if they fail to correct the problem or establish other successes, (ie, a long string of failures - what are the odds of the party suriving a long string of failures?) only then might they see their power decrease.
Hmmm.
That sounds really good - if done right could really rock.
If anyone in my part of the world wants to start such a campaign - count me in!

 

[Kask]

In prior editions to 3e you gained a stronghold and a domain as part of leveling up.

Actually, you gained followers as a result of having a stronghold. You didn't gain a stronghold or domain as part of gaining levels.