Comparison: Strongholds & Dynasties - Empire - Magical Medieval Society - Birthright
johnsemlak
First Post
I want to chime in with those who think this is a very useful thread. I'm looking forrward to your Fields of Blood analysis.
One thing, in your look at Birthright, have you taken into account their 3e conversion available at Birthright.net?
One thing, in your look at Birthright, have you taken into account their 3e conversion available at Birthright.net?
johnsemlak said:
I have downloaded the Birthright.net PDF but have not read it through. It did not have any real impact on what I was doing because I was developing my version at the same time, really. I was mostly done by the time the preliminary version became available. Also, unlike the work done at Birthright.net, I was trying NOT to do a straight conversion. I wanted generically-applicable rules suitable for my homebrew world, instead of Cerilia-flavored rules.
For example, the Source potential of a province in my variation is not reduced in any way by the Province's development level. The nature-vs-development tradeoff/conflict in Birthright was good for Cerilia's flavor, but not the way I wanted to go.
I added some rules on bloodlines to make families more clearly consistent. Rules on the heir, the head of the family, and what defines a noble family; rules on the long-term strengthening and weakening of bloodlines, and so on. I further tied the blood abilities to the Domains offered by the gods who were the sources of the bloodlines, with the intention that this would be easier for people to adapt to their own pantheons.
I also wanted to replace the war cards mass combat system with something else. Anything else, really.
I wound up taking the same tack that Empire and Cry Havoc took: using a single soldier as the basis for the unit's stat block. Cry Havoc is *much* more thorough, although I like the unit advancement mechanisms I came up with. Finally, one of the good things about Birthright was that a character of just about any level could be an effective ruler. The problem was, lucky dice rolls meant more than any other factor (the bloodline strength). So I created a 5-level Regent PrC, whose abilities focused on Domain Actions, and which needed any Bloodline as a Pre-requisite. That leveled the playing field a lot, although I still gave stronger bloodlines more oomph (the reserve RP pool was dependent on Regent Level and Bloodline Strength {Tainted, Minor, etc.}, not Bloodline Score, for example).
These were all areas that had not been clear enough in the original Birthright rules for me, or which had too much of a Cerilia-specific flavor. So I made changes for my own use, even before 3rd Edition was released. I adapted the changes once 3rd Edition came out.
I ran out of steam on the project partway through the warfare rules.
Twiggly the Gnome
Legend
Great thread, very informative! I wouldn't mind seeing someone with the Gamma World d20 book give a rundown of its' community rules, using Silveras's evaluation template.
Strongholds & Dynasties follow-up
Here is the a spreadsheet for handling the monthly production in the example province (Farmdale in the Barony of Kharith).
Notes:
Based on what I see here, the system looks unworkable. Tracking the food at this level of detail is great in the sense of knowing when famine is nigh, but it is abysmal drudgery to plot it all out month-by-month for each province. Because the food is tracked at such a level of detail, and the other resources use the same rules for production, they also need to be tracked to the same level of detail. A simpler system, perhaps tracking only Surplus/Deficit resources, would be much more practical.
Here is the a spreadsheet for handling the monthly production in the example province (Farmdale in the Barony of Kharith).
Notes:
- Wood is not on the list of resources. It is mentioned under the detailed comments on the types of resources, but it was omitted from the table. Thus, I missed it when assigning resources and products to Farmdale. Oops.
- The attached sheet is one I came up with based on three days of working with the information in the book. Neither of the two forms in the book tracks information to this level of detail.
- The sheet here shows the area and population, from which is derived the Population Density. I used that as a "throttle" on the production. A fully-populated province (Density 130+ on the MMS:WE scale) would be able to produce all potential resources. A province with less-than-optimal density would produce less, represented by a multiplier. Farmdale's 112 is 70% of 130, so they can produce a total of 70% of the potential units. They can still produce 100% of any chosen resource type (example: they can produce 79 of 79 cattle units), but they can overall only produce 2,700 units of 3,857 potential units.
- As I mentioned before, the production has to be scaled to represent the size of the province. The static numbers fail otherwise; you would be unable to support a province with more than about 20,000 people altogether. The area I equated for the base is 100 square miles. Farmdale is 15.69 times that area, so all potential resource production is multiplied by that factor.
- Because of the population, the province produces 62 resources. That made for a rich list of what gets generated.
- I added some internal consumption for most of the non-food resources, because the scaling that enabled the province to feed itself (although a bad year could stilll hurt them) also made them insanely wealthy with goods to sell.
Based on what I see here, the system looks unworkable. Tracking the food at this level of detail is great in the sense of knowing when famine is nigh, but it is abysmal drudgery to plot it all out month-by-month for each province. Because the food is tracked at such a level of detail, and the other resources use the same rules for production, they also need to be tracked to the same level of detail. A simpler system, perhaps tracking only Surplus/Deficit resources, would be much more practical.
Construction Rules
My previous posts have been confined to the Government rules in each product. Half of Strongholds & Dynasties, though, is construction rules. A Magical Medieval Society also has an appendix that addresses this topic. Empire and Birthright offer construction options, but on an abstract scale.
To compare the systems, I decided to work up Kharith Keep.
Birthright: Kharith Keep would be part of a Castle (3) in the province, under Birthright rules. Although the Birthright rules refer to fortification of a province as "building a castle", I tend to think that castle is an abstract representation of a number of border forts and other defensive positions in the province.
Empire: Kharith Keep would be a Keep at Kingdom scale, I think, and nothing at Empire scale. I tend to think of Empire's Castles and Keeps as being symbolic of a network of defenses, much as Birthtight's castles are.
S&D has an extensive system for building. It earns bonus points because the buildings integrate with the Open Mass Combat System II. Each of the "stock designs" presented includes the hardness, structure points, and stability modifiers for use with the OMCSII, making it relatively easy for tactical combats to include breaching the walls (kudos for the breach rules in OMCSII). Cry Havoc, by contrast, treats terrain as obstacles in tactical combat (and does not offer rules for breaching walls); siege combat appears only in the "quick resolution" systems.
MMS:WE also has a good building system. It is shorter, and much more streamlined, than S&D's. I can't fault MMS:WE for not integrating with a Mass Combat system, as that was not its purpose. It does present hardness and hit points for the materials used in a building, however, so you can still make a hole in a wall using standard D&D rules.
Both books cover the essential factors of building: labor, materials, convenience of getting the materials to the work site, monstrous and magical labor savings, etc. S&D's prices are a good bit higher than MMS:WE's, though. That may stem from MMS:WE's basis in historical reality and S&D's base assumptions of fantasy world costs.
In the end, neither S&D nor MMS:WE is difficult to use. S&D has more page space devoted to construction, so is more thorough in presenting options and stock buildings, and presents some rules for having workers chop down trees themselves instead of bringing in cut wood, etc. However, a project under S&D's rules will have a much higher base cost than one built under MMS:WE, so which one you use may well come down to that as a determining factor.
Attached are two PDFs, one each for MMS:WE and S&D, showing the calculated costs of building Kharith Keep.
The parameters:
Kharith Keep is a fortress with a 20 ft thick curtain wall, 150 ft x 60 ft., with 8 2-storey 20 ft diameter round towers, 2 20 ft tall gatehouses, 1 2-storey donjon/keep, 1 stable, and 3 levels of underground chambers and passages.
The Keep was built with magical assistance limited to teleporting all needed workers and materials to and from the worksite as needed. Thus, neither sheet presents much added cost for carriage (conveyance of materials), and neither sheet makes use of magic to reduce costs otherwise.
My previous posts have been confined to the Government rules in each product. Half of Strongholds & Dynasties, though, is construction rules. A Magical Medieval Society also has an appendix that addresses this topic. Empire and Birthright offer construction options, but on an abstract scale.
To compare the systems, I decided to work up Kharith Keep.
Birthright: Kharith Keep would be part of a Castle (3) in the province, under Birthright rules. Although the Birthright rules refer to fortification of a province as "building a castle", I tend to think that castle is an abstract representation of a number of border forts and other defensive positions in the province.
Empire: Kharith Keep would be a Keep at Kingdom scale, I think, and nothing at Empire scale. I tend to think of Empire's Castles and Keeps as being symbolic of a network of defenses, much as Birthtight's castles are.
S&D has an extensive system for building. It earns bonus points because the buildings integrate with the Open Mass Combat System II. Each of the "stock designs" presented includes the hardness, structure points, and stability modifiers for use with the OMCSII, making it relatively easy for tactical combats to include breaching the walls (kudos for the breach rules in OMCSII). Cry Havoc, by contrast, treats terrain as obstacles in tactical combat (and does not offer rules for breaching walls); siege combat appears only in the "quick resolution" systems.
MMS:WE also has a good building system. It is shorter, and much more streamlined, than S&D's. I can't fault MMS:WE for not integrating with a Mass Combat system, as that was not its purpose. It does present hardness and hit points for the materials used in a building, however, so you can still make a hole in a wall using standard D&D rules.
Both books cover the essential factors of building: labor, materials, convenience of getting the materials to the work site, monstrous and magical labor savings, etc. S&D's prices are a good bit higher than MMS:WE's, though. That may stem from MMS:WE's basis in historical reality and S&D's base assumptions of fantasy world costs.
In the end, neither S&D nor MMS:WE is difficult to use. S&D has more page space devoted to construction, so is more thorough in presenting options and stock buildings, and presents some rules for having workers chop down trees themselves instead of bringing in cut wood, etc. However, a project under S&D's rules will have a much higher base cost than one built under MMS:WE, so which one you use may well come down to that as a determining factor.
Attached are two PDFs, one each for MMS:WE and S&D, showing the calculated costs of building Kharith Keep.
The parameters:
Kharith Keep is a fortress with a 20 ft thick curtain wall, 150 ft x 60 ft., with 8 2-storey 20 ft diameter round towers, 2 20 ft tall gatehouses, 1 2-storey donjon/keep, 1 stable, and 3 levels of underground chambers and passages.
The Keep was built with magical assistance limited to teleporting all needed workers and materials to and from the worksite as needed. Thus, neither sheet presents much added cost for carriage (conveyance of materials), and neither sheet makes use of magic to reduce costs otherwise.
Fields of Blood
Fields of Blood: The Book of War (Eden Studios)
Content:
Construction system: B+
Domain management system (small scale) : A
Domain management system (medium scale): A-
Domain management system (large scale) : B+
City/Urban Center details: N/A
Trade system: C
Internal Realm Politics system: A-
Inter-Realm Politics system: A
Resource Management system: A
Mass Combat system: A
Troop raising: A+
Dynastic heritage system: N/A
D&D/Fantasy content: A
Arcane Magic Integration: A
Divine Magic Integration: A
Short & Sweet: Excellent rules set. Excellent balance of breadth (how many factors/options are presented) and depth (how much detail is involved). There are numerous "levers" presented with which to "tune" the rules to fit your liking and style.
The Construction system is slightly more detailed than Empire, much less than S&D or MMS:WE. You have more options for WHAT to build than in Empire, but the process is abstract. The system focuses on the buildings/projects that impact defense and production; others (like basic residences) are not covered.
Domain Management: The system is abstract enough to be workable with any of the scales mentioned above. The presumed mapping scale, however, is 12-mile-across hexes; as a result, existing campaigns mapped with larger areas in mind (like mine) will not convert as easily. Which brings up the reason I gave slightly lower grades as the size increaes: although there is a sidebar which discusses scaling the upkeep costs to control realm size, it does not do so with general scale in mind (as in, all realms are expected to be larger or smaller) as it does with the balance of power (more or less domains with X units of area).
Cities are not detailed per se, although they can be improved, much like Empire, by the addition of improvements.
Trade is handled as a bonus to production for each realm. Resource management is generic, so there are is no "I offer 4 units of grain for his 1 lumber" type of trading. There are options so that trading with a different type of culture offers a different level of benefit to each side, though, which is a good optional addition.
Political operations are well-represented, better on the inter-domain than the intra-domain, though. Religion, Mages, and Rogues/Merchants are represented as semi-independent influences in the Domain. They are NOT available as separate domains (as in Birthright), but they offer benefits to the domain & settlement where they exist. However, it is possible for a ruler to use the Guilds (as they are called) of a foreign realm against it. In a similar vein, the ruler and the people share the resources of the domain; typically, the ruler spends both pools as s/he sees fit, but the DM can sometimes "commandeer" the people's share of resources and spend them as the people see fit, instead. There are also rules for regions to rebel, generally when treated poorly.
Resource Management is abstracted, but well-represented. The mix of race and terrain has a big effect, maintenance costs are presented, the rulers have some tools to improve the gathering resources and cut the costs of maintaining structures. MMS:WE was based on a specific mix of terrains in historical earth, so never addressed fantasy races or alternative terrains. Empire did a comparable job to FoB in this area. Although S&D offered great detail in this area, I may have to downgrade my opinion of it (I think S&D's system crashes above a certain point; I have posted a challenge in the S&D discussion thread in hopes someone can show me I am wrong). Where FoB seems to be weak is the presumed scale. The resource production presumes the land is defined in 12-mile-hexes, and that a kingdom of more than 7 such hexes is "large". My small Barony has 31 such hexes (based on land area), and is facing an enormous cost to maintain the government. This is so fundamental, however, that I am not sure attempts to "tune" the system using the "levers" will work out (I may have to tinker with ALL of them). Arnwyn asked about a "starting from scratch" scenario -- it should be workable under these rules, but may need a little finessing to get that first "region" set up.
The Mass Combat system is well-defined, with good comprehensive rules for converting D&D monsters to the system. Want to run a scenario of "The Coming of the Tarrasque" ? He's here, statted out, and ready to chew up your armies. Customizable units, elites, heroes, terrain effects, special formations, tactical maneuvers -- all are covered. Someone asked before about taking over a piece of land: there is a special section that discusses this specifically. Extensive coverage is given to the use of magic, including standard spells on the battlefield and new "Battle Magic" spells specifically.
Caveat: I have not actually used the Mass Combat rules, yet; my comments are based on reading them.
The raising and supporting of troops is covered in good detail. Maintenance and supply lines are represented. The systems are abstract, using the generic "resource points", but seem to fit well with everything else.
All D&D fantasy content is represented; monster races, arcane and divine magic ... very comprehensive and well-integrated. This includes my pet peeve with some of the other books: arcane and divine magic. The "guilds" of priests and mages can use their facilities to cast realm-scale magics. The facilities come in various sizes, and need to be upgraded from the base to reach the higher-level effects. A point I am particularly pleased with is that Druids get a separate set of structures and spells, just as Druids do as a base class. The structure sizing requirements are tied in well to the growth of the population.
A few general comments to round it out: There are liberal examples used in the book, and they almost all form a continuous mega-example. This was a weak point of S&D, I thought, in that there were too few examples, and each was isolated. It is much easier to see how it all fits together with integrated examples. There are numerous sidebars explaining how things work and how to adjust them; the recognition of the need for tinkering is a good thing. I also liked the occasional parenthetical comment; the humor worked for me. However, the editing could be better. There are a few too many sentences with extra words or missing words.
Fields of Blood: The Book of War (Eden Studios)
Content:
Construction system: B+
Domain management system (small scale) : A
Domain management system (medium scale): A-
Domain management system (large scale) : B+
City/Urban Center details: N/A
Trade system: C
Internal Realm Politics system: A-
Inter-Realm Politics system: A
Resource Management system: A
Mass Combat system: A
Troop raising: A+
Dynastic heritage system: N/A
D&D/Fantasy content: A
Arcane Magic Integration: A
Divine Magic Integration: A
Short & Sweet: Excellent rules set. Excellent balance of breadth (how many factors/options are presented) and depth (how much detail is involved). There are numerous "levers" presented with which to "tune" the rules to fit your liking and style.
The Construction system is slightly more detailed than Empire, much less than S&D or MMS:WE. You have more options for WHAT to build than in Empire, but the process is abstract. The system focuses on the buildings/projects that impact defense and production; others (like basic residences) are not covered.
Domain Management: The system is abstract enough to be workable with any of the scales mentioned above. The presumed mapping scale, however, is 12-mile-across hexes; as a result, existing campaigns mapped with larger areas in mind (like mine) will not convert as easily. Which brings up the reason I gave slightly lower grades as the size increaes: although there is a sidebar which discusses scaling the upkeep costs to control realm size, it does not do so with general scale in mind (as in, all realms are expected to be larger or smaller) as it does with the balance of power (more or less domains with X units of area).
Cities are not detailed per se, although they can be improved, much like Empire, by the addition of improvements.
Trade is handled as a bonus to production for each realm. Resource management is generic, so there are is no "I offer 4 units of grain for his 1 lumber" type of trading. There are options so that trading with a different type of culture offers a different level of benefit to each side, though, which is a good optional addition.
Political operations are well-represented, better on the inter-domain than the intra-domain, though. Religion, Mages, and Rogues/Merchants are represented as semi-independent influences in the Domain. They are NOT available as separate domains (as in Birthright), but they offer benefits to the domain & settlement where they exist. However, it is possible for a ruler to use the Guilds (as they are called) of a foreign realm against it. In a similar vein, the ruler and the people share the resources of the domain; typically, the ruler spends both pools as s/he sees fit, but the DM can sometimes "commandeer" the people's share of resources and spend them as the people see fit, instead. There are also rules for regions to rebel, generally when treated poorly.
Resource Management is abstracted, but well-represented. The mix of race and terrain has a big effect, maintenance costs are presented, the rulers have some tools to improve the gathering resources and cut the costs of maintaining structures. MMS:WE was based on a specific mix of terrains in historical earth, so never addressed fantasy races or alternative terrains. Empire did a comparable job to FoB in this area. Although S&D offered great detail in this area, I may have to downgrade my opinion of it (I think S&D's system crashes above a certain point; I have posted a challenge in the S&D discussion thread in hopes someone can show me I am wrong). Where FoB seems to be weak is the presumed scale. The resource production presumes the land is defined in 12-mile-hexes, and that a kingdom of more than 7 such hexes is "large". My small Barony has 31 such hexes (based on land area), and is facing an enormous cost to maintain the government. This is so fundamental, however, that I am not sure attempts to "tune" the system using the "levers" will work out (I may have to tinker with ALL of them). Arnwyn asked about a "starting from scratch" scenario -- it should be workable under these rules, but may need a little finessing to get that first "region" set up.
The Mass Combat system is well-defined, with good comprehensive rules for converting D&D monsters to the system. Want to run a scenario of "The Coming of the Tarrasque" ? He's here, statted out, and ready to chew up your armies. Customizable units, elites, heroes, terrain effects, special formations, tactical maneuvers -- all are covered. Someone asked before about taking over a piece of land: there is a special section that discusses this specifically. Extensive coverage is given to the use of magic, including standard spells on the battlefield and new "Battle Magic" spells specifically.
Caveat: I have not actually used the Mass Combat rules, yet; my comments are based on reading them.
The raising and supporting of troops is covered in good detail. Maintenance and supply lines are represented. The systems are abstract, using the generic "resource points", but seem to fit well with everything else.
All D&D fantasy content is represented; monster races, arcane and divine magic ... very comprehensive and well-integrated. This includes my pet peeve with some of the other books: arcane and divine magic. The "guilds" of priests and mages can use their facilities to cast realm-scale magics. The facilities come in various sizes, and need to be upgraded from the base to reach the higher-level effects. A point I am particularly pleased with is that Druids get a separate set of structures and spells, just as Druids do as a base class. The structure sizing requirements are tied in well to the growth of the population.
A few general comments to round it out: There are liberal examples used in the book, and they almost all form a continuous mega-example. This was a weak point of S&D, I thought, in that there were too few examples, and each was isolated. It is much easier to see how it all fits together with integrated examples. There are numerous sidebars explaining how things work and how to adjust them; the recognition of the need for tinkering is a good thing. I also liked the occasional parenthetical comment; the humor worked for me. However, the editing could be better. There are a few too many sentences with extra words or missing words.
Fields of Blood: Misc. Observations
I wanted to single out for special mention a few elements I thought very important in Fields of Blood: The Government style, Culture type, and Race interactions.
Most systems presume a single cultural type. All kingdoms are about the same style, and any differences are mostly cosmetic. Technology is about the same from realm to realm, until you deal with the massed hordes of Orcs (which usually do not have a proper "realm"). As I mentioned in a previous post, I was dissatisfied with the way Birthright handled nomadic tribes, and so wrote new rules for them when coming up with my modified version. It did offer a nation of Goblins as a real, functional realm, which was great to see; but the human realms had mostly the same effectiveness in government, etc.
Fields of Blood recognizes these differences. The types of civilization offered (4) are varied enough to cover most standard fantasy roles, while still being small enough in number as to be easy to remember and understand easily. Likewise, there are a few labeled styles of government (5) that cover the styles most fantasy literature does. Each offers some variation from the base values in the rules; some beneficial, some not. In combination, they can model a good number of cultures, and help give a different feel to each.
Finally, Fields of Blood also recommends you make a simple matrix for how the races of your world view each other, and apply benefits and penalties when working race-to-race. A generic table is provided, but customized is recommended.
I wanted to single out for special mention a few elements I thought very important in Fields of Blood: The Government style, Culture type, and Race interactions.
Most systems presume a single cultural type. All kingdoms are about the same style, and any differences are mostly cosmetic. Technology is about the same from realm to realm, until you deal with the massed hordes of Orcs (which usually do not have a proper "realm"). As I mentioned in a previous post, I was dissatisfied with the way Birthright handled nomadic tribes, and so wrote new rules for them when coming up with my modified version. It did offer a nation of Goblins as a real, functional realm, which was great to see; but the human realms had mostly the same effectiveness in government, etc.
Fields of Blood recognizes these differences. The types of civilization offered (4) are varied enough to cover most standard fantasy roles, while still being small enough in number as to be easy to remember and understand easily. Likewise, there are a few labeled styles of government (5) that cover the styles most fantasy literature does. Each offers some variation from the base values in the rules; some beneficial, some not. In combination, they can model a good number of cultures, and help give a different feel to each.
Finally, Fields of Blood also recommends you make a simple matrix for how the races of your world view each other, and apply benefits and penalties when working race-to-race. A generic table is provided, but customized is recommended.
mattcolville
Adventurer
Wow. A very comprehensive review, very fair.
Originally, the scale of FoB was 1 hex = 24 miles, as that jives with the overland movement rules. It may be worth revisiting the decision to scale it down to 12 miles for any revision we do.
In general, I'm interested in hearing any comments or suggestions on how to improve the book.
Originally, the scale of FoB was 1 hex = 24 miles, as that jives with the overland movement rules. It may be worth revisiting the decision to scale it down to 12 miles for any revision we do.
In general, I'm interested in hearing any comments or suggestions on how to improve the book.
Similar Threads
