|
Post by Rigil Kent on Dec 20, 2015 11:41:44 GMT -6
I realize I'm probably jumping the gun here, but I thought I'd kick off the discussion anyway. In the next installment of the adventure path, I'm presuming that we're going to be setting up our new kingdom so we really need to come up with a name for it. I'm thinking that 'land' needs to be in the name to go with the "Rostland" that we mostly originate from (well, Andrei and Walker, at least, since Tess and Walays are technically outlanders) and the "Kamelands" which is south of us. The area that we've mostly explored appears to be principally the "Narlmarches" (see this map; be advised, this is a large map so if you have a crappy internet connection, it could be trouble) so we might have Narl in name? The Shrike River feeds into the Tuskwater lake, which is where the Stag Lord's fort was at. So those two names might come into play as well. So, some suggestions or ideas: - TUSKLANDS - because of the Tuskwater lake which is evidently pretty important for the region
- SHRIKELANDS - see before-mentioned Shrike River.
- NARLANDS - for the Narlmarches. Personally not a fan of this one.
- Maybe the SWORDLANDS since we are creating this kingdom anew at the point of a weapon? That's a bit too martial though and invites neighbors to grow concerned
- FREILANDS - because "Freeland" is weird looking.
- Something like MIDLANDS might also work but is just kind of boring.
- Going back to the Narlmarches, we could go with MARCHLANDS, but again, that has the potential of sounding very martial.
- Personally, I think we should just totally rip off DALELANDS from Forgotten Realms with the (in-game) thinking that we want people to move here and it isn't a big jump from "Narlmarch" to "Narlmarsh"
I'd like to avoid us naming it after any of the PCs if possible. My recommendation would be to use Stag in our future city name (and locate it there over the fort.) Maybe something like "Stag Falls" or "Staghomme" or something. Maybe Stagdale? Thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by LabRat on Dec 22, 2015 23:02:44 GMT -6
sorry for the late response. We haven't had a lot of down time at my parent's place. Let me take a moment to think about the names and maybe I can come up with some suggestions as well. I like where you are going though in terms of traditionally naming kingdoms based on the region or area.
Since we are jumping the gun....Something we also need to discuss is how we are going to go about building our kingdom. Are we going to be known as being on the benevolent side of things or are we going to conquer at the point of a sword? I know that this time around there were some pretty black and white characters in terms of who the bad/nice guys were, but what are we going to do in terms of those that fall in the gray area? Are we going to attack and ask questions later, or to try to reason things out and use force as a last result. The reason why I am asking is that I believe that at the very least Akiros always stuck me as the odd one of the Stag Lord bunch. Twice he asked us to surrender before he attacked. At the time, I was perfectly fine with wiping everyone out but, after it was all said and done (i.e. as we were driving home that night), I felt like that we didn't necessarily have to kill him at the time. This was reinforced by N8 saying that these characters had a lot of background story, so there is a chance that we could potentially gain allies in certain situations even though we are fighting the enemy. I guess what I am asking is if we care to take the time to examine individuals as being assets or are we going to mow them all down indiscriminately?
Another thing we need to start thinking about is what are our plans in terms of roles in our new Kingdom. What type of government are we going to have, and how are we going to make decisions regarding major kingdom decisions?
|
|
|
Post by Rigil Kent on Dec 23, 2015 12:16:12 GMT -6
sorry for the late response. We haven't had a lot of down time at my parent's place. Let me take a moment to think about the names and maybe I can come up with some suggestions as well. I like where you are going though in terms of traditionally naming kingdoms based on the region or area. No worries. I just wanted to start the discussion. With X-Mas here, I didn't expect many responses for a while. As all of us are Good, I expect we'll be more benevolent, yeah? Andrei at least is trying to become more ... honorable (I'm using the Honor mechanic from Ultimate Campaign for my personal use, even if I don't actually use it in the game), so he's definitely going to be making the effort to be a Good Guy (tm). Good questions. Personally, I'm of the whole "don't stab me in the back and we're good" mindset. So as long as they're not Evil and actively trying to undermine us, we can probably let bygones be bygones and all that. IMO, of course. I'm all for using force as the last resort - yeah, I'm training to be a badass swordsman but "I tell you that it is far better to be a warrior tending his garden rather than a gardener at war." In any other situation, when we did not have the Stag Lord breathing down our neck and a whole bunch of other hostiles, I would have been perfectly okay with trying to suborn the guy. But with all of the hostiles there and knowing that the bandits had eaten a sentient being, I think it made perfect sense for us to refuse to surrender. If we had been able to isolate that guy, things might have been different. But in this case, I think we did exactly what was necessary. Perhaps that guy could have stabilized? Having reviewed the rulership rules in Ultimate Campaign, I don't think they really handle any kind of government but the traditional "monarchy dictatorship" which is too bad, really. As to roles, some of them are pretty obvious - e.g., Tess as the High Priest, Walays as the Grand Diplomat - but others are not so much. I was thinking Walker should be the Councilor. I'll put Andrei forward as the "Ruler" but he will be one of those uncomfortable with the leadership position so he'll constantly seek out the "small council" (aka, the other PCs) for major kingdom decisions. My thinking about him being the ruler is principally a political one - Brevoy and the Swordlords sent us here and since Andrei is training to become a Swordlord, I figure having him nominally in charge will ease a lot of any conflicts with Brevoy down the road. We have a bunch of unfilled roles that we'll need to figure... JMHO...
|
|
|
Post by Gigermann on Dec 23, 2015 12:40:24 GMT -6
I've been mentally referring to it as Stagfort. I expect, after the official takeover, we'll want to disassociate from the Stag Lord entirely, and name it something not stag-related.
I expect the situation there will be a slow build-up like for Oleg's—people will just start showing up for this-or-that reason. Some people will stand out as more helpful, and get tasked to manage things. People will naturally follow the most leader-like (or be encouraged to defer to the one the most leader-like suggests they defer to). It will be a despotism at the start, as they usually are; after that, who knows?
|
|
|
Post by Rigil Kent on Dec 23, 2015 12:50:31 GMT -6
I've been mentally referring to it as Stagfort. I expect, after the official takeover, we'll want to disassociate from the Stag Lord entirely, and name it something not stag-related. However, with Walker going to ride a stag and likely wear that stag helmet... if there was a waterfall nearby, I would have gone with Stag Falls. I'd rather the PCs be the ones giving the orders than an NPC. Hence, my suggestions for our leadership positions.
|
|
|
Post by Gigermann on Dec 23, 2015 13:05:10 GMT -6
I was referring to the other positions not filled by PCs
|
|
|
Post by Rigil Kent on Dec 23, 2015 13:23:42 GMT -6
Our biggest question ... is a flag. We need a flag.
|
|
|
Post by Rigil Kent on Dec 23, 2015 17:13:26 GMT -6
Giger brought an good point, that we might want to steer clear of having "Stag" anywhere in the name for the future city. As before, using the Tuskwater or Shrike R. as a basis might be a good idea. - FORT TUSKWATER, perhaps? A bit martial sounding...
- I can't come up with something that has SHRIKE in it ...
- I think it would be really neat if we could find a way to honor Tyg-Titter-Tut in some way ... maybe TYG'S LANDING or something?
|
|
|
Post by LabRat on Dec 25, 2015 23:06:12 GMT -6
Giger brought an good point, that we might want to steer clear of having "Stag" anywhere in the name for the future city. Completely agree with this. I came to the same conclusion a bit ago, so I am glad we are on the same page. With that being said, Tyg's Landing is my favorite so far just because it has actual meaning to the name and it gives tribute to the fallen. There can be no thing more honorable than that, and will also coincide with our good guy mostly benevolent angle.
|
|
|
Post by Rigil Kent on Dec 26, 2015 15:41:32 GMT -6
I guess the important question is what does the GM need from us in this regard? Or am I totally jumping the gun and should just wait?
|
|
|
Post by WxMAN on Dec 29, 2015 19:31:11 GMT -6
I guess the important question is what does the GM need from us in this regard? Or am I totally jumping the gun and should just wait? Right now I am perfectly happy to sit back and let y'all hash out how you want your kingdom to operate (who rules, ruling system, alignment, etc). Whatever you decide is fine with me as this is your story, not mine. There should be at least one session between now and when you have to form your kingdom so there is some time, and I am not pushing anything on Kingmaker so people can transition their focus to Red Sky
|
|
|
Post by Magman on Apr 25, 2016 18:27:25 GMT -6
You sure that shouldn't be Knots Landing As our kingdom expands I think each PC should get a chance to name one of the cities.
|
|
|
Post by Rigil Kent on Apr 25, 2016 19:01:02 GMT -6
So we'll have Andreiton, and Tessville, and Walayston, and Walkervale, right?
|
|
|
Post by WxMAN on Apr 26, 2016 14:00:14 GMT -6
Just an FYI for Rigil - I may need to lean on you a bit heavier than normal with regards to how Kingdom's operate and whatnot in a more realistic fashion (or at least in a "realistic D&D" fashion. Medieval politics, social structure, economics, etc is really really outside of my wheelhouse and I want to make sure that it is satisfactory to you (using the caveat of it being a fantasy land, so it obviously departs from the real world in some areas) as well as everyone else, but it would also be a nice learning opportunity for me.
I'm going to try and follow the rules from Ultimate Campaign and Ultimate Rulership as a point of reference as they are supposedly better and more updated version of the Kingmaker rule set. I don't expect anyone to read these rules or know them, in fact it'd almost be better if y'all didn't understand the mechanics to avoid min-maxing and just allowing the kingdom to grow more in a way the PCs want. I'd rather y'all not go "ohh well.. I'd really like to build a library or whatever, but technically we should build a bath house because it is slightly more optimal".
|
|
|
Post by Rigil Kent on Apr 26, 2016 14:16:14 GMT -6
Just an FYI for Rigil - I may need to lean on you a bit heavier than normal with regards to how Kingdom's operate and whatnot in a more realistic fashion (or at least in a "realistic D&D" fashion. Medieval politics, social structure, economics, etc is really really outside of my wheelhouse and I want to make sure that it is satisfactory to you (using the caveat of it being a fantasy land, so it obviously departs from the real world in some areas) as well as everyone else, but it would also be a nice learning opportunity for me. Well, to be fair, there really isn't a realistic "this is how they operated" rule because irritating humans were involved, so even if there are "rules", they were inevitably broken. Fortunately, three of your players - myself, Giger and Magman - have played Crusader Kings 2 to one extent or another, so ... Yeah, about that ... I've become pretty familiar with those rules cause I'm mostly going to be using them myself for my Saturday game. So, if nothing else, I'm well aware of how jacked up a 'kingdom' can get with a couple of bad rolls (the PC kingdom in my game (or cantref, since its 5th century Wales) has all negative kingdom attributes right now, along with Unrest of 11, due to them getting hit with a "plague" over the winter.) It's going to be tough for them to pull the cantref out of the nose-dive its in, but we'll see...) In regards to your concern about it being satisfactory, so far, I really like the Kingdom Building rules, although man ... the Control DC for even a small kingdom can get pretty high, pretty fast...which, I guess, makes sense given that you're actually running a fricking kingdom ...
|
|
|
Post by Rigil Kent on Apr 27, 2016 19:18:59 GMT -6
Oh, man. This is one awesome spreadsheet. Totally gonna use that ... now I need to see if I can upload it to Google Docs and it work correctly!
|
|
|
Post by Magman on Apr 27, 2016 19:36:56 GMT -6
Not quite what I was thinking but, Hey I can deal with it I believe that Walker is better suited for the Marshal role. Being a Druid and liking the great outdoors that would suite him best. We came up with a name for our new city but not for the Kingdom. I do like Rigil's suggestion of Dalelands.
|
|
|
Post by WxMAN on Apr 27, 2016 19:43:47 GMT -6
I figured Walker would be the head of the Parks and Recreation Department
|
|
|
Post by Rigil Kent on Apr 27, 2016 19:56:12 GMT -6
I figured Walker would be the head of the Parks and Recreation Department He's the Parks and Recreation Marshal, see?
|
|
|
Post by Rigil Kent on Apr 28, 2016 10:56:55 GMT -6
I'm going to try and follow the rules from Ultimate Campaign and Ultimate Rulership as a point of reference as they are supposedly better and more updated version of the Kingmaker rule set. FYI, I have both books in PDF format and have been reviewing them. The Ultimate Rulership is very nice; I like a lot of the extra stuff they add. Population is handled a bit more believable in that supplement and I like the application of the "Danger" modifier according ot the hexes and the like. Something else UR added (which I very much appreciate) is Construction time for the buildings. I was already kind of wincing at the notion one could spend the BPs and BAM! Insta-Permanent Castle, so yeah, even though it is wildly unrealistic that a Castle would only take 12 months (per the UR ruleset), that's better than it appearing immediately and I suppose one can make allowances for spellcasting to radically decrease build times... UR has already shifted (slightly) how I'm going to be handling a few things in my Casus Belli game...
|
|
|
Post by WxMAN on Apr 28, 2016 11:12:42 GMT -6
Sounds good. I guess this is going to be a new thing for the lot of us, and it may be a little hit and miss, but I'll try and make sure things are fair towards y'all.
It'll be interesting to see how this all goes.
|
|
|
Post by Rigil Kent on Apr 28, 2016 12:40:56 GMT -6
Had an amusing thought: once we've actually established our kingdom, to truly prosper, we'll need alliances and alliances means arranged marriages. So make a note, WxMAN: at some point, I think it would be hilariously awesome if some of us (or perhaps just Andrei if no one else wants to jump through these hoops) had to establish a dynastic marriage of some sort. ETA: Just imagine the hilarity of this particular group trying to navigate politics...
|
|
|
Post by LabRat on Apr 28, 2016 14:53:25 GMT -6
Had an amusing thought: once we've actually established our kingdom, to truly prosper, we'll need alliances and alliances means arranged marriages. So make a note, WxMAN: at some point, I think it would be hilariously awesome if some of us (or perhaps just Andrei if no one else wants to jump through these hoops) had to establish a dynastic marriage of some sort. ETA: Just imagine the hilarity of this particular group trying to navigate politics... Shit, I'll jump through that hoop. I would find it hilarious if N8 had to find someone suitable for Tess. I wish him the best of luck.
|
|
|
Post by Magman on Apr 30, 2016 13:13:25 GMT -6
What happened to the city kingdom spreadsheet?
|
|
|
Post by Rigil Kent on Apr 30, 2016 13:26:56 GMT -6
It went the way of the dodo because, as I continued to dig through the kingdom rules, I started to notice errors and inconsistencies that made the file flawed. I'm going to use this one which is a lot more in depth. And prettier. You should already have permissions for it but ... hey, Giger, can you add a link to it between Spreadsheet and Obsidian Portal? Maybe call it Kingdom ?
|
|
|
Post by Magman on Apr 30, 2016 13:37:04 GMT -6
Got it!
|
|
|
Post by Rigil Kent on May 3, 2016 16:30:23 GMT -6
Not quite what I was thinking but, Hey I can deal with it So, what were you thinking then?
|
|
|
Post by Magman on May 3, 2016 18:31:30 GMT -6
Just that each one of us gets a choice of names. Nothing other than that. Walkervale would not be my choice, I haven't decided yet what it would be.
|
|
|
Post by WxMAN on May 11, 2016 19:32:15 GMT -6
Next session y'all will be establishing your kingdom. This session may feel a bit disjointed as these are new rules for everyone and it may be a bit rough as we look up things and get used to how the mechanics work.
So here is what y'all need to decide (some of this has been discussed above, but final decisions need to be made on Friday or before)
Kingdom Alignment: ? Chaotic: +2 Loyalty; Evil: +2 Economy; Good: +2 Loyalty; Lawful: +2 Economy; Neutral: Stability +2 Kingdom Name: ? Kingdom Positions: Rules, Consort, Councilor, General, Grand Diplomat, Heir, High Priest, Magister, Marshal, Royal Enforcer, Spymster, Treasyrer, Viceroy, Warden Kingdom Build Points (BP): ? Cost 1,000 GP per BP
Settlement Name: Tyg's Landing Settlement Terrain Type: Hill+Coast+River+Ruin; Castle is half cost if "ruin" is not scrapped for BPs.
For those who haven't seen the rules a "turn" for a kingdom consists of this: Phase 1 — Upkeep: Check your kingdom’s stability, pay costs, and deal with Unrest. Phase 2 — Edict: Declare official proclamations about taxes, diplomacy, and other kingdom-wide decisions. Phase 3 — Income: Add to your Treasury by collecting taxes and converting gp into BP, or withdraw BP from your kingdom for your personal use. Phase 4 — Event: Check whether any unusual events occur that require attention. Some are beneficial, such as an economic boom, good weather, or the discovery of remarkable treasure. Others are detrimental, such as foul weather, a plague, or a rampaging monster
Major concepts: Consumption: Consumption indicates how many BP are required to keep the kingdom functioning each month. Your kingdom’s Consumption is equal to its Size, modified by settlements and terrain improvements (such as Farms and Fisheries). Consumption can never go below 0. Control DC: Some kingdom actions require a check (1d20 + modifiers) to succeed—this is known as a control check. The base DC for a control check is equal to 20 + the kingdom’s Size in hexes + the total number of districts in all your settlements + any other modifiers from special circumstances or effects. Unless otherwise stated, the DC of a kingdom check is the Control DC. Economy: This attribute measures the productivity of your kingdom’s workers and the vibrancy of its trade, both in terms of money and in terms of information, innovation, and technology. Your kingdom’s initial Economy is 0 plus your kingdom’s alignment and leadership modifiers. Kingdom Check: A kingdom has three attributes: Economy, Loyalty, and Stability. Your kingdom’s initial scores in each of these attributes is 0, plus modifiers for kingdom alignment, bonuses provided by the leaders, and any other modifiers. Many kingdom actions and events require you to attempt a kingdom check, either using your Economy, Loyalty, or Stability attribute (1d20 + the appropriate attribute + other modifiers). You cannot take 10 or take 20 on a kingdom check. Kingdom checks automatically fail on a natural 1 and automatically succeed on a natural 20. Loyalty: Loyalty refers to the sense of goodwill among your people, their ability to live peaceably together even in times of crisis, and to fight for one another when needed. Your kingdom’s initial Loyalty is 0 plus your kingdom’s alignment and any modifiers from your kingdom’s leadership role. Size: This is how many hexes the kingdom claims. A new kingdom’s Size is 1. Stability: Stability refers to the physical and social well-being of the kingdom, from the health and security of its citizenry to the vitality of its natural resources and its ability to maximize their use. Your kingdom’s initial Stability is 0 plus your kingdom’s alignment and leadership modifiers. Treasury: The Treasury is the amount of BP your kingdom has saved and can spend on activities (much in the same way that your character has gold and other valuables you can spend on gear). Your Treasury can fall below 0 (meaning your kingdom’s costs exceed its savings and it is operating in debt), but this increases Unrest. Unrest: Your kingdom’s Unrest indicates how rebellious your citizens are. Your kingdom’s initial Unrest is 0. Unrest can never fall below 0 (anything that would modify it to less than 0 is wasted). Subtract your kingdom’s Unrest from all Economy, Loyalty, and Stability checks. If your kingdom’s Unrest is 11 or higher, the kingdom begins to lose control of hexes it has claimed. If your kingdom’s Unrest ever reaches 20, the kingdom falls into anarchy.
|
|
|
Post by WxMAN on May 11, 2016 19:52:29 GMT -6
Current NPC stats for potentially filling roles (you'll still have to convince them to join and agree to the role you want them to, some of which will be easier than others)
Jhod - STR 10, DEX 8, CON 13, INT 12, WIS 18, CHA 14 Kesten - STR 17, DEX 8, CON 13, INT 10, WIS 12, CHA 14 Oleg - STR 11, DEX 9, CON 10, INT 12, WIS 15, CHA 8 Svetlana - STR 8, DEX 9, CON 10, INT 11, WIS 12, CHA 15 Perlivash - STR 9, DEX 17, CON 13, INT 16, WIS 14, CHA 16
|
|