Birthright: Chimaeron

There will be no cities next game. It is a lot of work to split up the province anyway, and is just free GB generation.

Consider a Realm regent bonus for diversity: +RP for faiths represented, +GB for guilds represented, (maybe a + TP for law holders, +1 to actions for source holders?)

Gives an incentive for regents to encourage competition?

How about a random roll each season from nothing up to X amount. Disease can hit any season. And having an amount and season set in stone is too easy to plan for. Not knowing when or how much attrition will strike you seems far more interesting.

DM Juan wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 20, 2021 1:04 pm

To be honest, I want to somehow encourage people not to all amalgamate into a unity, and keep everything within strict boundaries. I'd rather sprawling guilder/templars that spread across multiple realms, but don't occupy slots in every province of those realms.

Idea:
A way to encourage more holding holders in a province is to scale up the DC more for higher level rules
Maybe Rule DC=10+2/new level, so law 4 to 5 = DC20

That would make it more reasonable to not bother ruling up past 2, and to tolerate someone else with a 2.

Ruling up Law is allready much harder then ruling up Temples or Guilds, since you can add Law to Guilds and Temples. Would not want Law to be harder. Guilds and Temples are the more profitable ones anyway.

RM - Ragrum Mithrilhand wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 20, 2021 1:16 pm

Ruling up Law is allready much harder then ruling up Temples or Guilds, since you can add Law to Guilds and Temples. Would not want Law to be harder. Guilds and Temples are the more profitable ones anyway.

Almost as if the support of the law holding is worth it's level in resources for every action the temple/guild is taking. A law holder giving unconditional support should be shown some gratitude no?

Gods: We would go back to scratch like in Diaspora, where there are no established Gods, and you create new ones from scratch. Not being allowed both Population Growth and Bless Land is an interesting thought, I wonder if it will have strange effects. There would be tension between the pop-growth temple gaining ground, making the blessing templar not want to bless as it becomes less and less cost-effective.

Indeed, a Law Holder should demand support in exchange for their passive bonus to all the actions undertaken by the guilds/temples.

SAS - Survivors at Sea wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 20, 2021 1:21 pm

RM - Ragrum Mithrilhand wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 20, 2021 1:16 pm

Ruling up Law is allready much harder then ruling up Temples or Guilds, since you can add Law to Guilds and Temples. Would not want Law to be harder. Guilds and Temples are the more profitable ones anyway.

Almost as if the support of the law holding is worth it's level in resources for every action the temple/guild is taking. A law holder giving unconditional support should be shown some gratitude no?

The Law wants the Temples and guilds to grow cause if they make more, the Law gets more to. So not encouraging them to grow is counter productive,

Don't forget, you can Law Claim provinces too. And oppose loyalty in a Province. Law Holders can contest everything... there is a lot of power in being a Law Holder, even if the power is often unused.

DM Juan wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 20, 2021 1:04 pm

To be honest, I want to somehow encourage people not to all amalgamate into a unity, and keep everything within strict boundaries. I'd rather sprawling guilder/templars that spread across multiple realms, but don't occupy slots in every province of those realms.

I think this will be VERY difficult to achieve. Cooperation = power. Action econ being what it is, forming a 3-4 regent power bloc is just so rewarded by the base game mechanics (and IRL politics) that it is hard to overcome. Sprawled out realms who arent fully cooperating will be eaten by those who do observe amalgamated unity within their strictly enforced borders. Tribalism trumps individualism.