Mongoose's Strongholds and Dynasties

[johnsemlak]

Thanks, finally some info on this book

I'll have to dig up an old thread on AEG's Empire, which had some good comments on that book, and see how they compare.

 

[johnsemlak]

As promised, AEG's Empire by Mike Mearls was discussed (with some useful feedback from teh author) in this thread:

http://www.enworld.org/forums/showthread.php?t=67365&highlight=empires

The thread also has some comparisons between Empire and the Birthright 3e PDF.


AEG's Empire was also discussed here:
http://www.enworld.org/forums/showthread.php?t=70040&highlight=empires

 

[Cavalorn]

some spells specific to running a nation would be great.

One reason why I didn't devote more attention to the magical side of things in S&D is that I'd already written a 64-page supplement (Sovereign Magic) which is purely on the subject of territorial magic spells, large-scale casting, ruling regions and the whole Saruman bit:

http://www.mongoosepublishing.com/detail.php?qsID=272&qsSeries=Encyclopaedia

As far as the role of religion in running a nation goes, S&D does have the Minister of Religion office and some religion-related governing actions, but I can certainly see myself writing a supplement covering this field in more detail (maybe a new Encyclopedia Divine that supplements S&D but does not require one to have it) if my employers at Mongoose like the idea.

Things I would have liked to See: I would have liked more information on trade, though the rules on resources was a good start.

There's a chapter devoted to trade between nations, which ties in with the resource management rules. Let me know what else you would have liked and I'll see what can be done.

 

[jasamcarl]

How is the geography broken down; are maps broken down into discreet, persistent units? Are there such things as distinct provinces; are they dynamic or fixed?

 

[Cavalorn]

How is the geography broken down; are maps broken down into discreet, persistent units? Are there such things as distinct provinces; are they dynamic or fixed?

I'd rather other people gave their own impressions, but as the writer I guess I should give my own input.

Yes, there are distinct provinces. The governmental system works like this: there is one regime sheet, on which the statistics and type of government are detailed, and one or more province sheets that are retained by the DM, detailing the inherent resources, factions and so on that are found in the province.

Provinces are not fixed, inasmuch as there is no hard and fast rule to say that a province must be of such-and-such dimensions. This was deliberate on my part. What I wanted to create was a system whereby existing maps and campaign settings could easily be adapted across into the S&D mechanics. S&D uses set formulas to calculate such things as resource yield, population growth, tax revenue, available solidery and so on, based on the data that already exists in the campaign. The only real limit on a province is the number of different types of resource that it can produce.

Essentially, you can divide up an existent campaign map into one or more provinces according to what will make for the most convenient management. It can be as intricate or as straightforward as the DM wants to make it. When I put the system together, I envisioned provinces as fairly large; you could certainly have a single kingdom with only one province.

The really important distinction between one province and the next is political. Each province has a faction section in which the standings of the three tiers of society - nobles, merchants and workers - along with any other factions are detailed. The governing actions you take in the province affect the whole region and thus affect how each of the tiers of society therein thinks of your regime. So, if you tax the peasants of one province and use the proceeds to feed the peasants of another province, the former will be angry while the latter will be grateful.

 

[jasamcarl]

I'd rather other people gave their own impressions, but as the writer I guess I should give my own input.

Yes, there are distinct provinces. The governmental system works like this: there is one regime sheet, on which the statistics and type of government are detailed, and one or more province sheets that are retained by the DM, detailing the inherent resources, factions and so on that are found in the province.

Provinces are not fixed, inasmuch as there is no hard and fast rule to say that a province must be of such-and-such dimensions. This was deliberate on my part. What I wanted to create was a system whereby existing maps and campaign settings could easily be adapted across into the S&D mechanics. S&D uses set formulas to calculate such things as resource yield, population growth, tax revenue, available solidery and so on, based on the data that already exists in the campaign. The only real limit on a province is the number of different types of resource that it can produce.

Essentially, you can divide up an existent campaign map into one or more provinces according to what will make for the most convenient management. It can be as intricate or as straightforward as the DM wants to make it. When I put the system together, I envisioned provinces as fairly large; you could certainly have a single kingdom with only one province.

The really important distinction between one province and the next is political. Each province has a faction section in which the standings of the three tiers of society - nobles, merchants and workers - along with any other factions are detailed. The governing actions you take in the province affect the whole region and thus affect how each of the tiers of society therein thinks of your regime. So, if you tax the peasants of one province and use the proceeds to feed the peasants of another province, the former will be angry while the latter will be grateful.

Neat. Am i correct in assuming from the preview text that establishing controll over a region on the part of the players requires the construction of a Stronghold? Also, is there an action that would allow a pc ruler to redefine the provinces in game?

I'm pretty much set on this within a month I think, unless Fields of Blood gets fantastic reviews.

 

[Cavalorn]

Neat. Am i correct in assuming from the preview text that establishing controll over a region on the part of the players requires the construction of a Stronghold?

No, a stronghold's not necessarily required, though it is likely (in my estimation) that most players would want to do it that way. What you need to establish control really depends on the route you are taking to power. In one of the earlier chapters, the book covers the various different means that can be taken to gain power over a region, including conquest, colonization, awarding of land by a liege lord, political marriage and so on.

If you sailed to an uncolonized region with a boat full of political dissidents, for example, you could set yourself up with only a wooden longhouse and a stockade.

Also, is there an action that would allow a pc ruler to redefine the provinces in game?

With the DM's help, yes, you could do that. The DM would have to work out from the statistics to hand how much of province A's gem production (for example) is transferred across to province B when the boundaries are redrawn. What would be much more likely is the rearrangement of boundaries within a province.

What S&D cannot do is detail absolutely everything in a given kingdom on a one-to-one mapping basis, with different land hexes giving different resources and so on. That's not what I was after. Instead, there's a system that allows enough quantification of what goes on in a province to make it playable and useful, with enough flexibility that the DM ought to be able to apply the system to resolve most governmental questions. I was more concerned to create flexible, straightforward ground mechanics that a DM could apply to cover situations that were not explicitly detailed in the book than to write a rule for each possible circumstance. Using (for want of a better word) the land management 'language' of S&D should make kingdom management an easy business. The system allows interface between players on the micro level and kingdoms on the macro, which is what I set out to do.

 

[jasamcarl]

No, a stronghold's not necessarily required, though it is likely (in my estimation) that most players would want to do it that way. What you need to establish control really depends on the route you are taking to power. In one of the earlier chapters, the book covers the various different means that can be taken to gain power over a region, including conquest, colonization, awarding of land by a liege lord, political marriage and so on.

If you sailed to an uncolonized region with a boat full of political dissidents, for example, you could set yourself up with only a wooden longhouse and a stockade.



With the DM's help, yes, you could do that. The DM would have to work out from the statistics to hand how much of province A's gem production (for example) is transferred across to province B when the boundaries are redrawn. What would be much more likely is the rearrangement of boundaries within a province.

What S&D cannot do is detail absolutely everything in a given kingdom on a one-to-one mapping basis, with different land hexes giving different resources and so on. That's not what I was after. Instead, there's a system that allows enough quantification of what goes on in a province to make it playable and useful, with enough flexibility that the DM ought to be able to apply the system to resolve most governmental questions. I was more concerned to create flexible, straightforward ground mechanics that a DM could apply to cover situations that were not explicitly detailed in the book than to write a rule for each possible circumstance. Using (for want of a better word) the land management 'language' of S&D should make kingdom management an easy business. The system allows interface between players on the micro level and kingdoms on the macro, which is what I set out to do.

Sounds good. Thanks for the responses.

 

[Ranger REG]

I'm still waiting for a comparative review of Empire (AEG) vs. Strongholds & Dynasties (Mongoose) vs. Fields of Blood (Eden Studios).

I want to know which are their strong points and weak points (realm management and mass combat), and which one is the better product overall.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

There's a chapter devoted to trade between nations, which ties in with the resource management rules. Let me know what else you would have liked and I'll see what can be done.

I really should have been more specific- the rules given work very well for trade between PC controlled kingdoms, but lack definition for NPC domains, I will likely come up with a chart for NPC trade interests, and a sheet to record them on, but it would have been nice - not all provinces will be under PC control. A sea and river born equivalent to the roads rating, covering just how much cargo can be shipped during a given month, would also have been useful trade by water actually having been more common than that by road for quite a long time. (Breaks into an off key rendition of the Eerie Canal...) I could also have used a system for semi-randomly placing the resources for a given province. In many ways this is much more a player's book than one for DMs. A DMs supplement for this book would be well appreciated, but by its nature cater to a significantly smaller audience.

I was not aware of Soverieign Magic, I am adding that to my list for Santa. A Divine version would also be a great addition! I will keep my eyes open for it. Good stuff!

As I said I ran a Birthright campaign, and this book should allow me to run a similar game in 3e. The addition of gunpowder is nice, my homebrew setting is set during a period analogous to our reformation/counter reformation - with war, economics,religion and politics factoring in to produce around a century of warfare. (They are now around year 3 of thirty years of war in the area they started in.)

My other difficulty is purely personal taste - the book goes into far greater detail on stronghold building than I really need, but the rules for establishing other structures is so integral to the same system that I can't really complain.

For some reason it is much easier to describe what problems that I have with any given book than come up with a coherent explanation of why I like it. I very much like Strongholds & Dynasties, but I am not sure my post adequately stated that fact. The resource and warfare sections are very useful indeed, creating a much more detailed system than that explored in Birthright. The new version of the OMCS is also very nice, and ties in well with the resource and taxation system in the book. And since I already own Seas of Blood adding the navies and trading vessels is also relatively easy.

And a quick question in the event that anyone from Mongoose reads this topic again - will the province sheets be available as PDFs on your web site any time soon? Being able to print them up before each session would be very helpful.

The Auld Grump