-
WB - Water's Blessing
- King
- Posts: 712
- Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2018 4:01 pm
- Location: Mind your own business
Post
by WB - Water's Blessing » Mon Jun 22, 2020 7:58 pm
RR - Exalted Voice wrote: ↑Mon Jun 22, 2020 6:52 pm
Landed Guilder (or Fighter/Thief) > Unlanded Thief/Priest > Unlanded Priest or Guilder > Landed Wizard > Landed Priest > Landed Paladin/Ranger > Landed Fighter > Unlanded Wizard > Unlanded Fighter/Ranger/Paladin
My totally fair assessment of game mechanics on what is worth playing in our start from scratch/near nothing games. Thieves have set up cost (creating those trade routes) - but no long term action drain and make significantly more gold than fighters. And the small difference between in WP is actually missing the point. You have a Fighter LT who can do much of your training anyway.
I think this is a very fair assessment. Seems like nerfing guilds a bit and/or boosting warriors might be sensible for a future iteration. Main issue is, of course, income. Perhaps we should consider dropping trade routes and return the exploratory trade action instead in future iterations? Or, perhaps, changing law claims so only fighters can make them, or only fighters can use law to contest any other holding, and making law claims automatic in some situations so there's no quibble about it -- ie. if province taxes are at normal or heavy, law claims automatically happen? Fighters are inefficient users of guild/temple/source holdings (can't cast spells, can't trade route well, etc); part of the solution should be making other classes inefficient users of law holdings.
WB - Temple of the Water's Blessing
"You can be forgiven, if you make amends..."
-
WM - The Waste Mage
- King
- Posts: 667
- Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2018 11:41 am
Post
by WM - The Waste Mage » Mon Jun 22, 2020 8:02 pm
I was going to play a guilder maybe so I hate suggesting this but....
Maybe Trade Routes should add +1 to tax roll and to each holding income roll. More trade equals more to tax, more spent in markets and more being donated to church. Spreads the wealth around rather than putting it all in the guilder's hands. Comes to an extra 3 GB per province total.... same as trade route between 2 level 3 provinces.
-
WM - The Waste Mage
- King
- Posts: 667
- Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2018 11:41 am
Post
by WM - The Waste Mage » Mon Jun 22, 2020 8:10 pm
What I would really like to try is a game where everyone is first level maximum. Keep realm spells etc just base their particulars on source level and RP. With higher levels it takes away the fun of things like tournaments and wars and assassinations etc because you have super heroes fucking up the curve. Some things would have to be tweaked but imagine playing a game where you're just as killable as any random soldier in your army. Maybe make Armor Damage Reduction as well as AC so an ogre hitting you for 12 points has 8 points taken off for full plate and still breaks some ribs. I would enjoy a realistic game like that.
-
YK - Yuri Khavlor
- King
- Posts: 692
- Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2018 5:13 pm
Post
by YK - Yuri Khavlor » Mon Jun 22, 2020 8:23 pm
3rd edition/pathfinder had something similar. An E6 game used 6th level as the cap, with minor benefits for levels after that. No new class features, sneak dice, spell slots etc.
Not permanent first level, but a lot less power differential.
YK - Yuri Khavlor
Lord Mayor of Lyssan
“Nature is not cruel, but pitilessly indifferent. The hardest lesson for one to learn, is to admit that things might be neither good nor evil, but simply callous -- indifferent to all suffering"
-
HaQ - Hakim al-Qadr
- Posts: 180
- Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2018 6:46 pm
Post
by HaQ - Hakim al-Qadr » Mon Jun 22, 2020 8:37 pm
Doing an E8/9(thief classes) or E5/6(thieves) cap seems like it could be fun. Would balance out the classes a bit too. At least it would make Population Growth harder at high-province levels.
Automatic Law Claims on all holdings/provinces (that cannot be turned off - so no you cannot pressure the Law Regent to remove it)
Automatic Trade Route tax by province owner set on each end (ideally you could Law Claim trade routes - but I don't think BirMail allows that).
Side Effect: It would make it a desire for Guilders to annex province?
Easy: Set it to 1GB on each end no matter what and leave it forever (this will capture most of the game term anyway)
Sensible: 50% of the trade route income from your side - min 1. The easy answer to how much is that? Divide your province level by 4.
Turn to Avani before you return to Avani
Hakim al-Qadr
Mayor of Barniere
-
HaQ - Hakim al-Qadr
- Posts: 180
- Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2018 6:46 pm
Post
by HaQ - Hakim al-Qadr » Mon Jun 22, 2020 8:47 pm
Fulgar's success was partially structural. The Rjurik regents were numerous and due to game set up with starting armies - therefore simply had more units/ships in turn 1 than Dhoesone/Cariele. It also had a large part to do with well played diplomacy and logically laying out the advantage to an early strike that Fulgar employed.
Turn to Avani before you return to Avani
Hakim al-Qadr
Mayor of Barniere
-
TPK - The Pirates
- Posts: 308
- Joined: Fri Nov 15, 2019 6:42 pm
Post
by TPK - The Pirates » Mon Jun 22, 2020 9:31 pm
I'd be cautious about level-caps. That makes shorter lived races as (or more) advantageous to play rather than longer-lived ones.
Balancing systems requires a concerted effort on all the systems at play or there are unanticipated consequences (kind of like Grim & Gritty and having to rework all spells to balance them better).