Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 6575758" data-attributes="member: 996">There's no standard wealth/level in 5e, so you could give them a treasure trove at low level that could be used for the castle.  At worst, the heavy armor types could end up with AC a little "too high," as there's little else that an excess of cash does to imbalance the game.  You can't automatically make/buy magic items being the main thing. Yep, you could make adventuring & treasure-hunting to keep the castle in good repair and well defended a major motivation of the campaign.  Or, you could just make it a 'home base' that they don't have to much worry about once they've established it - threatening it only when you need a plot hook, time pressure, or whatever. Yes, the party should be placed in the feudal hierarchy, if they're not to disrupt things.  Or, if their castle is outside of civilized lands and not claimed by a kingdom (perhaps because it's such a monster-haunted region that no one else wants the responsibility of defending it), they could be a small, independent, power unto themselves.Yes, it would be strange to have a band holding a feud instead of an individual titled noble.  For one thing, succession would be uncertain.  Perhaps the king accepts them on condition that the feud reverts to the crown if their party breaks up or dies/disappears (as adventurers are wont to do)?  Then he can give it to whomever it's expedient to favor at that point.  Or, the King could allow them as castelains until he chooses a noble to give the castle to (with the 'understanding' that it won't happen until they're ready to give it up).   It matters, I suppose, because the PCs could just decide to walk away from their castle if it gets too inconvenient, like a homeowner walking away from an 'underwater' mortgage.</blockquote>

Verification