Realm Management System

I put together the basic framework of some rules for managing a realm awhile back for my game. I've typed them up into a pdf, and wanted to get some feedback on them. I have no designs on selling them, but plan to make them freely available. The system is designed to be a a sort of rules-light system, allowing for adventuring leaders rather than full time administrators. I've used the basic system, but fleshed it out a bit more.

So I wanted to get ENWorld's reaction - how do the rules look? Any weirdness or something that isn't clear? Do they sound like they'll work as advertised? Any suggestions, comments or criticism is more than welcome.

Looks quite well thought out, and the presentation is great. Let's put it this way, I'll be using it in my campaign when my group starts taking over nations, though I think I might modify it a bit by allowing social checks to modify some of the realm rolls (Intimidate, bluff, diplomacy, etc...) One, players like using their skills, and two, my group will be taking almost all of their holdings by force, so it would be extremely difficult for them to use the system as presented to run a functional realm.

As a side note, I saw "Request for Comments" and almost ignored the post, I'm a software Engineer, and calling this document a RFC insults your document.

azmodean said:

Looks quite well thought out, and the presentation is great. Let's put it this way, I'll be using it in my campaign when my group starts taking over nations, though I think I might modify it a bit by allowing social checks to modify some of the realm rolls (Intimidate, bluff, diplomacy, etc...) One, players like using their skills, and two, my group will be taking almost all of their holdings by force, so it would be extremely difficult for them to use the system as presented to run a functional realm.

As a side note, I saw "Request for Comments" and almost ignored the post, I'm a software Engineer, and calling this document a RFC insults your document.

Click to expand...

LOL - I'm glad you didn't. I mean the plain english version - I'd like to see some comments.

I hadn't thought of that, but PCs with different skills could certainly modify the Realm Rolls. One thing I wanted to stay away from though was using new, special, or unique skills. I mean if you say that you need Profession (ruler) ranks to lead a nation effectively, then you've just cut most PCs off from the system. They've been taking Spot and Tumble for ten levels after all. But if the party already has a lot of social skills, then they should definately apply to Realm Rolls. Maybe not directly, but succeeding with a check could provide a realm bonus. So if you use Perform to give a rousing speech that could get you a +2 to Popularity. Or using Intimidate in front of the troops could inspire them, giving a bonus to Security. And Bluff, Diplomacy, and Sense Motive are going to be very valuable when dealing with emissaries and the like.

Looks like a good draft, in the style of OD&D.

If you could work the existing social skills in there, though, that would rock on toast.

Hmm. Bluff could cover haggling, so could influence the economy. Diplomacy would be an obvious one for popularity. Intimidate could work for security -- your troops do *not* want to disappoint you!

You could even throw in some non-Cha skills as possible boosters. Like otherwise useless skills like Appraise could help out on the economy. Hmm...

Economy: Appraise, Bluff, K/Architecture, Profession/any
Popularity: Diplomacy, K/Local, K/Nobility, Perform/Oratory
Security: Gather Information, Intimidate, K/Geography, K/History

The knowledge skills I included are generally not taken, so it might give players a reason to take them. I include Profession/any for economy because, in my experience, it's hard to get a player to take ANY Profession skill for any reason.

I'd think either the best skill would apply, or each skill might give a small bonus. With mutliple choices, more characters have a chance of being good rulers. A bard can rule through pure charisma, while a wizard could carefully plan the affairs of her realm.

What do you think of that idea?

I think I definately need to work up some rules on using the social skills to influence society. I intend it to be fairly OD&Dish/rules light. Like I said in the text, its meant to be a general guide, not a minigame. And this is Dungeons and Dragons, not Nobles and Negotiations. Thus the advisors. But the social skills could definately work in there.

Perhaps a new category of Player-driven events, where the PCs do something to try and give themselves a boost. They could use Intimidate to make the troops not want to let you down, and so on as mentioned. Make a success and you add one to that modifier for the month. Blow it by five and you suck up a penalty. I'll have to go through the skill list to get some good examples.

That could work. A direct influence on the numbers wouldn't work too well; it would make it too easy for the PCs. But if they could use their skills to influence the events, that would not only be reasonable, it'd be pretty cool.

its old but I'm gonna bump it

I"m glad ya did! It is a nice addition to all of my campaign planning material.

Hmm... I really like this ruleset. It's simple and elegant enough to do exactly what it aims to. Particularly, I like that the realm's core statistics have been boiled down to be abstract without feeling disconnected.

I have only 3 questions/concerns:

1) From your example, it seems relatively easy to gather a large amount of increases to statistics without too much trouble. In playtesting, how has this panned out? Are players forced to compete with their neighbors or does everybody just jump up to the top rather quickly?

2) Trade? In the example, it was a roleplaying benefit that provided +1 security and economy. Given that, why doesn't everybody agree to trade? Unless you really don't want to give your number a bonus... I guess what I'm getting at is - are there downsides to trading? (For example, are the Dwarves losing 1 security since they are providing many of their weapons to the humans?) I imagine this would be tricky, as trade is meant to be beneficial, so I suppose the DM would limit it through practicality.. ("No! You can't arrange trade between your kingdom and the fiendish kingdom on the far side of the Impassable Mountains, across the Shipwrecking Sea, and on the Unreachable Island.")

3) Competition. How do the other realms interact? I know there are rules for holding off an invasion, but what about starting one? Or acquiring more lands? Would this just fall into the general area of in-game roleplaying benefits? One idea for raising armies: perhaps you can 'extract troops' from Security in much the same way you can nick gold from your Economy. That could maintain the abstract nature of the rules at any rate.

**Edit, fleshed out some of my comments.

I really like this. I don't know how I missed it the first time, but I definitely yoinked it this time. Our group is heavy into political RP (as well as combat), and though none of us has ever run a kingdom, this would still come in very handy.

I agree with the other folks - noncombat skills need to be worked in here. Cyberzombie had a really good example of what could be used in a given situation; I think the Leadership feat could also be fit in somehow (maybe grants a bonus to Popularity, or he can make Leadership checks or something).