|
Post by David on Sept 23, 2013 11:10:53 GMT -8
Not quite.You can't get more RP from them than they produce. You could get 100% of their RP (the Gold goes to the Guilds at the ends) and still absorb amounts from other Holdings totaling 50% of whatever RP they produce. (e.g. 100% of Trade Route RP plus 50% of the RP from your Guilds).
|
|
|
Post by kore on Sept 23, 2013 11:12:05 GMT -8
Let me start by saying, "I'm sorry for the next suggestion", I know you've put a lot of work into using some of my input. The capitalization may have been a bad idea as it makes the formatting of the document a bit disjointed. Perhaps I'm the only one. I made the prior suggestion when there was a confusion of terms (provinces, domains, etc.) and though those edits were absolutely necessary, I think the capitalization suggestion was a mistake. Also, I saw a mention of "provinces" in the latest revision.
|
|
|
Post by kore on Sept 23, 2013 11:13:42 GMT -8
Not quite.You can't get more RP from them than they produce. You could get 100% of their RP (the Gold goes to the Guilds at the ends) and still absorb amounts from other Holdings totaling 50% of whatever RP they produce. (e.g. 100% of Trade Route RP plus 50% of the RP from your Guilds). Makes sense, thanks.
|
|
|
Post by David on Nov 18, 2013 16:06:24 GMT -8
I've added (copied) a bunch of Realm Spells into the file. I haven't finished with the update from 3.5 yet, but I'm maybe halfway through.
|
|
|
Post by David on Nov 20, 2013 15:53:40 GMT -8
Pretty much done with Realm Spells. Modified income collection to have less math. Added distinction between Covert and Overt actions and Realm Spells to the beginning of the section on Actions.
|
|
|
Post by kore on Nov 20, 2013 16:30:16 GMT -8
Modified income collection... Again?! Edit: I see, that's the change from the prior revision that eliminated the +/- and introduced the Die Caps; definitely better.
|
|
|
Post by David on Nov 20, 2013 21:31:35 GMT -8
I changed it yet again to make Law Holdings and Trade Routes match up with the Less-Math system.
|
|
|
Post by David on Jan 27, 2014 2:40:57 GMT -8
I just realized that I failed at basic math when designing ruling styles. There is no reason to take anything other than 100% in whatever holding you have the most of. Any other option would get you less regency.
NEW PLAN!
No more ruling styles. You can get regency from all kinds of holdings. We will still use Table 1 for appropriate skills, as follows:
For each unique skill your faction characters have that is appropriate to that holding type, you get .25RP/level of holding. Your Regent can contribute two skills toward the accounting for each holding type. Your other main characters may contribute one skill each. This gives a max of 1RP/level of holding if your faction has _all_ the skills appropriate to the holding.
Due to the rule change, for the first turn, all player factions will collect full regency from their holdings.
(Side note: Perception will now count as a Guild skill, but may only be used if Thievery is not being used. This indicates you are running an honest business and keeping an eye out for thieves.)
|
|
|
Post by kore on Jan 28, 2014 14:59:18 GMT -8
What happens with Faction/City Actions that are free based upon the old Ruling Style?
|
|
|
Post by David on Jan 30, 2014 1:17:52 GMT -8
You may gain that benefit for any one Holding type for which you collect 75% 100% regency or more.
|
|
|
Post by David on Feb 21, 2014 23:01:01 GMT -8
Rules file updated to reflect changes to RP collection.
|
|