D&D 5E Enough about Darksun, is there anything preventing a 5.5E Birthright remake?

[Raiztt]

Here's how you really solve the 'settings problem':

WotC should just produce a comprehensive and detailed 'world building guide' that gives new DMs the tools, abilities, ideas, and seeds to create their own worlds whole cloth. The current DMG does this a little bit, but I'm thinking an entire hardbound book.

Other publishers have done just this, and there is a lot of material out there, but I think there are probably a lot of D&D players and DMs who never venture into 3rd party content - I could be wrong. Regardless, having the official D&D/WotC mark on a setting creation guide would definitely attract people.

 

[Arakhor]

(shrug) I'd play it.

I know that Mystara has a fan-created 5E setting; maybe Birthright could get a similar treatment?

Given that the iconic parts of the setting (variant races/cultures, blood powers, domain spells and awnsheghlien) can be easily converted and then used with the actual setting itself with fairly minor adjustments, there are at least four different 5E conversion PDFs to my knowledge, three of which can even be downloaded from Birthright.net.

 

[Digdude]

Posted that just to be rude?

 

[Mesero]

Kingdoms of nobles ruling over peasants with no democratic elections?
Rulers in endless wars?
Magic Blood only a few select rulers have?
People with a "Birthright" to rule others?

Sounds fairly bad.....

And how is Birthtright different than any monarchy in any D&D setting ever made? Just because it spells out the birghtright while all other setting stay quite about it but still have the descendent of the king be the heir, thus ruling being his birghtright?

Quite frankly, considering all the things in FR I find all the criticism and concerns leveled against Birghtright very silly.

 

[TheSword]

Kingdoms of nobles ruling over peasants with no democratic elections?
Rulers in endless wars?
Magic Blood only a few select rulers have?
People with a "Birthright" to rule others?

Sounds fairly bad.....

Lots of these are factually incorrect.

Nobility wasn’t a pre-requisite to ruling a kingdom. In fact many of the kingdoms were carved out by folks who were anything but noble.

There are very few actual wars going on, the game doesn’t have them as a default. It leaves things open. Lots of diplomacy and espionage tbough.

Actually anyone can have magic blood. It can be received by investiture rather than by being born into it (though that is an option) IIRC about half the rulers in the domain packs inherited their realm through parentage the rest were given it.

The birthright is a spiritual connection with the land, that ebbs and flows and grows with great deeds. It’s the divine right of kings but doesn’t depend on who your parents are and is enhanced by adventuring.

All sounds pretty good to me.

 

[Enrahim2]

And how is Birthtright different than any monarchy in any D&D setting ever made? Just because it spells out the birghtright while all other setting stay quite about it but still have the descendent of the king be the heir, thus ruling being his birghtright?

Quite frankly, considering all the things in FR I find all the criticism and concerns leveled against Birghtright very silly.

I am agreeing the criticism against birthright come across as silly. However there are a fundamental difference between monarchy in birthright and other settings. In birthright there is the mechanical entity called bloodline, that regulates your income and reserve capacity of an essential  mechanical resource called regency points.

Without bloodline you effectively cannot get regency points, and that puts extreme limitations on what you can expect to acheive as a ruler. In short birthright codifies in mechanics that certain people are inherently "better" than others to rule for no other reason than what family they come from. This element is not part of any other setting. Overthrowing a tyrant king to insert one of the people (or democracy) in their place is a viable trope in FR. This is a lot more tricky in Birthright.

However as we are not living in the 1800s, I hope we now have gotten to the point that we are not ripping up too many wounds among people having gone trough pains due to having been deceived by the real world equivalent thinking..

 

[TheSword]

I am agreeing the criticism against birthright come across as silly. However there are a fundamental difference between monarchy in birthright and other settings. In birthright there is the mechanical entity called bloodline, that regulates your income and reserve capacity of an essential  mechanical resource called regency points.

Without bloodline you effectively cannot get regency points, and that puts extreme limitations on what you can expect to acheive as a ruler. In short birthright codifies in mechanics that certain people are inherently "better" than others to rule for no other reason than what family they come from. This element is not part of any other setting. Overthrowing a tyrant king to insert one of the people (or democracy) in their place is a viable trope in FR. This is a lot more tricky in Birthright.

However as we are not living in the 1800s, I hope we now have gotten to the point that we are not ripping up too many wounds among people having gone trough pains due to having been deceived by the real world equivalent thinking..

Except that bloodlines can be passed from person to person. So you aren’t inherently better - you just have a tool other people don’t have.

There is no obstacle in the rules to a democracy where every 4-8 years the bloodline was invested in a new person selected.

 

[Enrahim2]

Except that bloodlines can be passed from person to person. So you aren’t inherently better - you just have a tool other people don’t have.

There is nothing wrong with a democracy where every 8 years the bloodline was invested in a new person selected.

Well, there is a problem with the fact that it immediately breaks down if you ever elect a president that just don't feel like handing over their bloodline after the next (obviously rigged) election..

(obviously rigged, as the president covertly spent regency points to ensure reelection, and no one else in the domain was supposed to have access to that kind of power)

The inherently better problem isn't much aliviated when the basic ways to get into the club is either to have these initialy better humans willingly grace you, or perform brutal ritualistic murder.

 

[TheSword]

Well, there is a problem with the fact that it immediately breaks down if you ever elect a president that just don't feel like handing over their bloodline after the next (obviously rigged) election..

(obviously rigged, as the president covertly spent regency points to ensure reelection, and no one else in the domain was supposed to have access to that kind of power)

The inherently better problem isn't much aliviated when the basic ways to get into the club is either to have these initialy better humans willingly grace you, or perform brutal ritualistic murder.

Hmm. Not sure how you played the game, but it doesn’t matter if the old regent is willing or not if they don’t have a choice because everyone around them intends for it to happen. Being a regent wasn’t being a god… just close to it.

Investiture never had to be willing. There is an adventure in there somewhere though I think.

 

[Gradine]

Posted that just to be rude?

As many have said in this thread, I find the setting is largely uninteresting. I just happen to like to communicate in funny memes. This marks me as an older millennial, i am told.