Forgive me if this has been hashed out in the past (and if so, links welcome!). But I am curious to hear people's thoughts on the "Domain Game." Do you love it? Hate/avoid it? Never get around to that kind of level? Do you prefer to retire and start again rather than play on in what can arguably be be a completely different game as estate manager/diplomat/warlord/cult leader etc.? Or do you like carrying on, but prefer to become more and more of a superhero? If you have gone "Domain," were your experiences positive or negative? What worked? What didn't?
My own context for this is that I have only played in one long-lived campaign that segued into the domain game, but it was fantastic. Loved it. I mean, I love "sweet-spot" mid-level play, and even scary low-level play where you can be taken out by a nasty slip on the ice or an unusually large mosquito, but for me the domain game provided years of amazingly memorable play.
And yet, it seems to be a style or phase of the game that you don't hear that much about.
Happy to share more of my own perspective on this, but for now I'll just put the topic out there.
Thanks!
I really wanted to seque into domain management in one of my Dark Sun campaigns, but the group fell apart when two of the players moved out of state, and the rest lost interest due to that.
I had plans to start small, maybe with a single settlement, and go light on the bookkeeping, focusing on the big decisions, like securing water and food, and dealing with major threats to the settlement.
Eventually, if the PCs were sucessful, I would likely have involved them in bigger and bigger politics, as their territory grew in value.
Alas, another idea had to be put on the back burner.
I love the concept; it's hard to find rules that support it but don't get in the way - probably Mentzer's D&D Companion Set approach is the best I've seen. I have GM'd a lot at this level, but I would like to see more Game of Thrones-y politics & war; the tendency is just to default to a standard high level dungeon bash for most play, with the domain stuff merely backdrop.
I'm wondering if it might work best in play-by-post, with the slower pace of play allowing more time for 'realm turns' type stuff - PBP struggles with dungeon bashing but conversely ought to do politics management & war well, I think.
Quote from: Zirunel;1126831Forgive me if this has been hashed out in the past (and if so, links welcome!). But I am curious to hear people's thoughts on the "Domain Game." Do you love it? Hate/avoid it? Never get around to that kind of level? Do you prefer to retire and start again rather than play on in what can arguably be be a completely different game as estate manager/diplomat/warlord/cult leader etc.? Or do you like carrying on, but prefer to become more and more of a superhero? If you have gone "Domain," were your experiences positive or negative? What worked? What didn't?
My own context for this is that I have only played in one long-lived campaign that segued into the domain game, but it was fantastic. Loved it. I mean, I love "sweet-spot" mid-level play, and even scary low-level play where you can be taken out by a nasty slip on the ice or an unusually large mosquito, but for me the domain game provided years of amazingly memorable play.
And yet, it seems to be a style or phase of the game that you don't hear that much about.
Happy to share more of my own perspective on this, but for now I'll just put the topic out there.
Thanks!
Wait a sec... let me find my ACKS Fanboy Hat... now where did I put that... wait, it's on my head. :D
The domain game is ACKS main claim to fame.* Even in the Core Rules, though, there's a lot of detail. If you want something more "rules-light", ACKS may not be your bag. If, OTOH, you want to go full-bore Tony Bath scale Domain Game, economics and politics and war, oh my!, ACKS is your huckleberry.
Quote from: S'mon;1126838I love the concept; it's hard to find rules that support it but don't get in the way - probably Mentzer's D&D Companion Set approach is the best I've seen. I have GM'd a lot at this level, but I would like to see more Game of Thrones-y politics & war; the tendency is just to default to a standard high level dungeon bash for most play, with the domain stuff merely backdrop.
I'm wondering if it might work best in play-by-post, with the slower pace of play allowing more time for 'realm turns' type stuff - PBP struggles with dungeon bashing but conversely ought to do politics management & war well, I think.
Running the Domain Game as PBP or PBeM, or even bluebooking**, has a lot of potential. Depending on the level of detail you want for mass combat, that might be better handled on the tabletop in rotation with any conventional RP, whether by the principal PCs or by their henchmen. But the bookkeeping and decisionmaking of domain management and the like definitely sounds like a good fit for asynchronous play.
*Psst. Dirty little secret - ACKS works just fine for "superheroic" high-level personal-scale play. ;)
**Internet points if you get the reference.
The main problem we've always had with Domain level rules is that they rarely, if ever, interact with the player scale rules in a meaningful way. It's practically a separate mini-game you run in the background, particularly since, unless you only want one or two players involved at the Domain level, it largely involves breaking up the party because each will need its own separate Domain to participate at that level.
Birthright kinda did okay with splitting it up into basically Law (Fighters), Commerce (Rogues), Sources (Wizards) and Religion (Clerics) who could all share the same realm, but it was very contingent upon players all agreeing to play certain classes so as not to actually compete with one another. It also starts to fall apart if you try to port it into later editions with different assumptions and additional classes that don't quite fit the Fighter, Thief, Cleric, Magic-User paradigm.
So, over the years I've instead gravitated towards finding systems that can determine some basic resources (ex. what's your population base, tax revenue, number of vassals/troops) and then create sets of interesting EVENTS that I, as the GM, can sprinkle into the world for the player's to deal with.
If they don't engage with the event they can solve issues by spending their resources (throw troops at an invader... some will die, but it'll quell the problem; only replacing said troops becomes a new problem), but that well will eventually run dry. If they instead engage with the problem and do well they can instead gain resources (ex. they gain the arms, armor and gold of the invaders to use to equip new troops and cover other expenses) as determined by the GM.
It also means the players have the freedom to get creative, both in terms of how they deal with events, but also in how they wish to grow their domain. You don't need to fret if there's not a mechanic for recruiting wizards because your PCs have decided to try and open a Wizard's college in their capitol. You roleplay out their efforts to find and recruit the faculty and students, with them possibly using their domain's resources to assist. Maybe they decide that making wizards into the equivalent of vassal knights would be a way to recruit faculty (costing them the rents from those lands because they're now being collected by the wizard knight). Maybe they decide to hire bards to travel the land announcing the formation of the university; costing them coins from their treasury. Maybe they go on a personal recruitment drive which costs them time they could be devoting to other things. The GM decides how well any of these work based on their common sense.
Basically, its GM judgement with a list of resources the players' have access to in addition to their personal abilities and some random tables to serve as GM inspiration and it works better than 99% of any codified Domain level rules I've ever played with.
Quote from: RandyB;1126840Wait a sec... let me find my ACKS Fanboy Hat... now where did I put that... wait, it's on my head. :D
The domain game is ACKS main claim to fame.* Even in the Core Rules, though, there's a lot of detail. If you want something more "rules-light", ACKS may not be your bag. If, OTOH, you want to go full-bore Tony Bath scale Domain Game, economics and politics and war, oh my!, ACKS is your huckleberry.
I have ACKS (I have pretty much EVERY domain system!) :D - AIR it's good, a bit complex in places but it's ground-up approach which makes it much easier to integrate with regular play. I've been reading over domain systems tonight while generating a small manor (Ramvira Tower, pop. 100, avg yearly income 1000gp, avg expenses 740gp) - will go to ACKS next. :)
Quote from: Chris24601;1126843The main problem we've always had with Domain level rules is that they rarely, if ever, interact with the player scale rules in a meaningful way. It's practically a separate mini-game you run in the background, particularly since, unless you only want one or two players involved at the Domain level, it largely involves breaking up the party because each will need its own separate Domain to participate at that level.
Birthright kinda did okay with splitting it up into basically Law (Fighters), Commerce (Rogues), Sources (Wizards) and Religion (Clerics) who could all share the same realm, but it was very contingent upon players all agreeing to play certain classes so as not to actually compete with one another. It also starts to fall apart if you try to port it into later editions with different assumptions and additional classes that don't quite fit the Fighter, Thief, Cleric, Magic-User paradigm.
So, over the years I've instead gravitated towards finding systems that can determine some basic resources (ex. what's your population base, tax revenue, number of vassals/troops) and then create sets of interesting EVENTS that I, as the GM, can sprinkle into the world for the player's to deal with.
If they don't engage with the event they can solve issues by spending their resources (throw troops at an invader... some will die, but it'll quell the problem; only replacing said troops becomes a new problem), but that well will eventually run dry. If they instead engage with the problem and do well they can instead gain resources (ex. they gain the arms, armor and gold of the invaders to use to equip new troops and cover other expenses) as determined by the GM.
It also means the players have the freedom to get creative, both in terms of how they deal with events, but also in how they wish to grow their domain. You don't need to fret if there's not a mechanic for recruiting wizards because your PCs have decided to try and open a Wizard's college in their capitol. You roleplay out their efforts to find and recruit the faculty and students, with them possibly using their domain's resources to assist. Maybe they decide that making wizards into the equivalent of vassal knights would be a way to recruit faculty (costing them the rents from those lands because they're now being collected by the wizard knight). Maybe they decide to hire bards to travel the land announcing the formation of the university; costing them coins from their treasury. Maybe they go on a personal recruitment drive which costs them time they could be devoting to other things. The GM decides how well any of these work based on their common sense.
Basically, its GM judgement with a list of resources the players' have access to in addition to their personal abilities and some random tables to serve as GM inspiration and it works better than 99% of any codified Domain level rules I've ever played with.
Yes, I agree - in an RPG this is vastly more fun than "Spend a Resource Point" type systems. Players want to be playing their PCs, not book-keeping. So the mechanics need to be kept absolutely minimal to not get in the way.
If you liked BECMI Companion or ACKS system, I would recommend using the revised Strongholds & Domain system found in Axioms/Axioms Compendium as a substantial improvement on both systems. You can get it for $1 by signing up for the Autarch Patreon.
I ran a domain level game on RPoL that ran until there was a need for mass combat.
That was really just an excuse to give up as the book keeping had gotten to be more work than fun.
Used "An Echo Resounding" with some tweaks and except for the need to track larger and larger amount of things, I thought the system itself was fine.
For what it's worth, here's the link (https://rpol.net/game.cgi?gi=62159&date=1532196442).
Here's some rules for growing a manor I knocked up, based on 1e/OSRIC Charisma. I had tried generating a manor using A Magical Medieval Society: Western Europe, and quickly realised that it just worked out at 10gp/person/year which is what OD&D said back in 1974! So I went with that.
___________________
MANORS & DOMINIONS
OSRIC says high level Fighter Lords can extract 1gp/month per resident in a freehold; for general play I'm going with 10gp/year gross income for a typical borderland manor, which is the OD&D level. Initially attract I reckon freeholders on a manor equal to 'Max Henchmen' score x10 and if there's plenty of land grow quickly to around 100, slower thereafter. Of course diplomacy and conquest can enable rapid growth...
Lord's CHA: Initial Freeholders (Manor)
3-4: 10; Growth -3%
5-6: 20; Growth -2%
7-8: 30; Growth -1%
9-11: 40; Growth +0%
12-13: 50; Growth +0%
14: 60; Growth +0.5%
15: 70; Growth +1.5%
16: 80; Growth +2%
17: 100; Growth +3%
18: 150; Growth +4%
19: 200; Growth +5%
A typical manor in settled farmlands is 640 acres, or 1 square mile. Maximum manor size in borderlands is roughly 2 miles diameter (one 2 mile hex), or just over 3 square miles, of which no more than 1 square mile is likely farmland.
Manor Current Population & Base Growth Rate (annual)
20 +25%
40 +20%
60 +15%
80 +10%
100 +5%
125 +4%
150 +3%
200 +2%
300 +1%
400 +0%
500 -1%
600 -2%
700 -3%
800 -4%
900 -5%
I am all about faction-level meta-games in the campaigns I run, and the domain game is a subset of faction games - a faction might be a domain, or it might be a cult, a guild, a family (noble or otherwise), etc. Ideally, I try to get the players controlling one (or more) of the factions, regardless of whether they're running it in-character with their main PCs or if it means creating a set of secondary "leader characters" to direct a faction that their normal PCs are members of, but, even if it's something the players aren't interested in, I'll still run the faction game solo to generate larger-scale events in the campaign, which can, in turn, drive adventures for the PCs to partake in, whether as members of a faction advancing its interests (or defending those interests from antagonistic factions), or being asked by NPCs to do things in response to faction-level events, or as free agents identifying and seizing opportunities created by faction interactions.
In the past I've used an ACKS domain game for PCs settling a new colony (and don't believe the "domain level is end-game content" propaganda - these PCs were 3rd and 4th level and it worked fine), but I've more often used the faction mechanics from various Sine Nomine games, which are designed to be used in exactly this way, right down to including suggestions for how PC actions and faction actions interact, and a couple of the games (off the top of my head, Darkness Visible (spy agencies) and Starvation Cheap (mercenary/military units)) having an explicit structure of "first run a faction turn to decide what the players' faction is doing, then assign the PCs to one of the actions affecting their faction and determine that action's outcome by playing it out as an adventure in the next session".
Stephen Chenault just did a GM Tricks of the Trade about Land as Treasure, where he also talked about adjusting the detail level of domain management/upkeep depending upon the state of the game: https://www.twitch.tv/videos/587832409
I haven't gotten to this point in any campaign I've been in so far, but it sounds like a lot of fun and I would love to someday. If I ever get my own game running I will probably assign some land as treasure. :D
Quote from: nDervish;1126919and don't believe the "domain level is end-game content" propaganda.
To add to this: I'm currently in a ACKS Dwimmermount PbP game and we started setting up a fort of our own outside the megadungeon when we were still mostly first level. It's been paying off serious dividends.
Well, in the Medieval-Authentic OSR Companion (https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/293292/RPGPundit-Presents-The-Old-School-Companion-1), I have rules for running noble houses, which is medieval-authentic domain play, you could say.
Besides that, there's also rules for more advanced-level activities for successful PCs, generally to be done at higher levels. Instead of trying to make it very mechanical, I try to focus on it being more organic to the nature of the setting.
Quote from: Zirunel;1126831Happy to share more of my own perspective on this, but for now I'll just put the topic out there.
So it sounds like perhaps my experience of the domain game may have been a little different from what is normally meant by that. Yes, by the time we were teen-levels, we had domains, they came with both expenses and revenues, and there was scope to increase revenue, but we really didn't get down into the weeds with the economic management of it all. I don't remember special "rules" or elaborate tables. On the DM side I don't think he had anything more elaborate than a price/expense list, probably culled from OD&D and AD&D, and some guidelines on revenues from villages and various enterprises, which he most likely made up (maybe after flipping through Traveller? Possible but who knows). That was it.
For us, the "domain game" was essentially political and military. The politics was rp'd out, no rules that I can remember. Military adventures did need wargaming rules, of course, for those occasions where we actually fought them out on the tabletop.
Economics mattered, of course, we had to finance our ambitious geopolitical projects, but it did not really lead to an estate-management game.
EDITED TO ADD: don't mean to imply economics was unimportant, it was huge. We spent enormously and were often short of cash, and that fact drove much of the game - money became far more important than "levels" or "personal abilities" or the usual D&D rewards - but for reasons we did not anticipate (but arguably should have), management of our "legitimate" enterprises did not offer practical solutions to our financial woes. We were forced to resort to other means than estate management to finance our ambitions. So the estate management side, although it provided some income, remained a minor element in the game. The Domain game was still a fantastic phase of the game, maybe the fantastic phase of the game, but more because of the politics and warfare than the book-keeping.
Greetings!
Yes, I love Domain-level games, both as a player and as a DM. I have DM'd several Domain-level campaigns for many years. They are fantastic, and great fun! There are so many nuances and cool elements that enter the campaign and the player's consciousness *at that point*--that aren't really present before that point. Politics, religion, influence, grand-scale warfare, recruiting armies, majestic tournaments, important diplomatic councils and meetings, crushing rebellions, romance is a huge element, vast civic projects, building castles, aqueducts and coliseums, enormous monuments, infiltrating new, foreign religions, and on and on.
I have found that most players love the romance, epic warfare, politics, and grand diplomacy--but are less enthused about the economics and bookkeeping. I have also found a few players that dearly love boring down into the fine economic details of various industries and regions of their domains--but they are a distinct minority.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Would it make sense to take inspiration from a PC game like Crusader Kings II, which on the surface looks like most strategy games but more often than not plays like a RPG in that you're more concerned with the people and politics compared to say Civilization which is more about resource management.
I'm thinking that the key to success for using any Domain Mechanics is to keep them out of sight of the players! They may work well 'behind the scenes' but they can harm immersion and get in the way of player identification with their PC as a person in the world.
Quote from: TimothyWestwind;1127255Would it make sense to take inspiration from a PC game like Crusader Kings II, which on the surface looks like most strategy games but more often than not plays like a RPG in that you're more concerned with the people and politics compared to say Civilization which is more about resource management.
Most players definitely prefer the political stuff to number crunching. And it has made for some fantastic campaigns, like my Wilderlands one where a barbarian rose from nothing (1st level) to meld together a disparate group of factions into a mighty empire - only to swiftly lose it again. :D
Quote from: SHARK;1127251There are so many nuances and cool elements that enter the campaign and the player's consciousness *at that point*--that aren't really present before that point. SHARK
That's an interesting point. In the early-mid 70s, my group were wargamers, then in the mid-late 70s we got into rpgs, still wargaming I suppose, but attracted to the personal, immediate investment in character that came with that. By the early 80s, in this one campaign that got that far, we were high level and playing the domain game. High level stuff. We could get others to swing the swords instead of us.
Basically we had gone full circle, and we were once more commanders playing a wargame campaign. And yet, after years of taking our characters up from 1st level nobodies, with everything we had been through, we were fighting with much more context, so much more invested in our success as commanders, so much more invested in the defeat of our enemies, than I ever remember from playing wargames before rpgs came along.
So yeah, even if it looked like an old-fashioned wargame campaign, the rpg "domain game" felt like so much more because of everything that led up to it.
Quote from: S'mon;1127257I'm thinking that the key to success for using any Domain Mechanics is to keep them out of sight of the players! They may work well 'behind the scenes' but they can harm immersion and get in the way of player identification with their PC as a person in the world.
Exactly my thoughts.
I'm not a big fan of Domain play, but when I've had PCs acquire territory and assets, I keep the bookkeeping to bare minimum. Definitely used the Traveller charts for merchant aspects of the game, and even then, it was NPCs who handled the tasks, as the PCs were busy with hero/leader stuff.
Has no one mentioned the old Birthright setting? That was probably the best Domain scale campaign that I have played with.
Quote from: Shasarak;1127276Has no one mentioned the old Birthright setting? That was probably the best Domain scale campaign that I have played with.
Not really familiar with it, but I just looked it up. Seems like it is a domain-scale game from the get-go, rather than a domain-scale phase that you eventually work your way up to from being a schmo, is that right?
Quote from: Zirunel;1127277Not really familiar with it, but I just looked it up. Seems like it is a domain-scale game from the get-go, rather than a domain-scale phase that you eventually work your way up to from being a schmo, is that right?
Pretty much, it trys to combine the base DnD game with Domain rules where you build up your influence within a Province month by month.
Quote from: Shasarak;1127276Has no one mentioned the old Birthright setting? That was probably the best Domain scale campaign that I have played with.
Quote from: Chris24601;1126843Birthright kinda did okay with splitting it up into basically Law (Fighters), Commerce (Rogues), Sources (Wizards) and Religion (Clerics) who could all share the same realm, but it was very contingent upon players all agreeing to play certain classes so as not to actually compete with one another. It also starts to fall apart if you try to port it into later editions with different assumptions and additional classes that don't quite fit the Fighter, Thief, Cleric, Magic-User paradigm.
It's okay if you're into OSR with a four-player all human party consisting of a cleric, fighter, magic-user and thief so they can all share and assist in growing the same territory, but in practice I found any other combination and/or more players tended to result in one or more players left out of the domain-side of play entirely since the nature of Regency in the setting was magical in nature (as in, if you didn't have magic blood you couldn't rule at all, how effectively you could rule was based on the strength of your magic blood and the main way to increase the power of your magic blood was conquer others with magic blood and take their power for yourself) and didn't really allow for power sharing of the same assets.
In essence, a second member of any of the four main class types in 2e was automatically competition and holding each other back from reaching their full potential.
That's probably one of the reasons it remained largely niche in terms of popularity relative to other domain management systems... it was a little TOO tied to its setting to be functional in more generic campaigns, especially later editions when classes started to diverge a more from the cleric, fighter, magic-user, thief class groupings of 2e.
As two 5e examples, where do a Celestial Pact Warlock or Eldritch Knight Fighter fit into those rules? Is the warlock a wizard because the default class is arcane or a cleric because the powers are granted directly by a celestial power like a cleric? It the eldritch knight a fighter because he can use military arms and armor or a wizard because he's also an arcane spellcaster? And again... the fundamental conceit of magic blood is a lousy fit for most non-Birthright settings.
Ironically, one of the better sets of Domain Rules I've ever used for a fantasy game was an adaption of some tables for the second edition of the Mechwarrior RPG that had all sorts of conflict related event tables that the GM was supposed to roll on for events that would occur six months down the line in order to provide time to weave rumors and other setup elements into the campaign (ex. if you rolled for a war breaking out on a given world... or kingdom if adapted to a fantasy setting... there would be rumors of unusual troop movements or the target would be looking to hire mercenaries to bolster their defenses against what their spies say is coming). Sure there was no magic in the results, but particular bits of high tech are easy to redefine as magic for purposes of setup (example, intercepted HPG transmissions becomes signs and portents seen by diviners or messages from the gods to the faithful... discovery of a LostTech cache is instead the discovery of a previously unknown ruin filled with monsters and treasures and so forth).
Taking some good ideas from ACKS (which is heavily inspired by BECMI system), here's what I have currently:
Manors & Domains
High level Fighter Lords (level 9+) can extract 1gp/month from their domain, 12gp/year per resident in a freehold; for other rulers the typical income is 10gp/year gross income for a typical borderland manor.
New Manors
Initially attract freeholders on a manor equal to 'Max Henchmen' score x10 and if there's plenty of land grow as per table below. Of course diplomacy and conquest can enable rapid growth...
For random potential areas optionally roll 3d4 for the likely gp/year reflecting resources; Fighter Lords add +2 to the roll. 10gp/year assumes a near optimum environment.
Lord's CHA: Initial Freeholders (Manor)
3-4: 10; Growth -3%
5-6: 20; Growth -2%
7-8: 30; Growth -1%
9-11: 40; Growth +0%
12-13: 50; Growth +0%
14: 60; Growth +0.5%
15: 70; Growth +1.5%
16: 80; Growth +2%
17: 100; Growth +3%
18: 150; Growth +4%
19+: 200; Growth +5%
A typical manor in settled farmlands is 640 acres, or 1 square mile. Maximum manor size in borderlands is roughly 2 miles diameter (one 2 mile hex), or just over 3 square miles, of which no more than 1 square mile is likely farmland. Exceptions apply to rulers of exceptional charisma - see below. Otherwise new manors must be created to administer the growing population.
Manor Current Population & Base Growth Rate (annual)
Under 20 +30%
20 +25%
40 +20%
60 +15%
80 +10%
100 +5%
125 +4%
150 +3%
200 +2%
300 +1% requires 1.5 square miles farmland
400 +0% " 2 sq m"
500 -1% " 2.5 sq m"
600 -2% " 3 sq m"
700 -3% " 3.5 sq m"
800 -4% " 4 sq m"
900+ -5% " 4.5 sq m"
A sub-infeudinated manor must have a lord or thane, preferably a henchman/retainer of the higher lord.
Resource Investment
For every 200gp spent on resource development, a manor will attract 1d10 more people. Growth limits still apply.
Typical Domain Costs
A typical domain has gross income of 10gp/person/year and expenses of 75% of income, leaving a net income of 2.5gp/person/year.
Garrison: 20% (civilised)-30% (borderland)-40% (wilderness) of income (2gp-4gp/person/year)
Stronghold Upkeep: 5% of stronghold cost per year; typical strongholds cost = annual domain income x2 (civilised) x3 (borderland) x4 (wilderness), so typically 10%-20% of income, 1-2gp/person/year
Salt Tax: 20% of gross income to higher lord, 2gp/person/year
Tithes: 0% (wilderness) -5% (borderland)-10% (civilised) of gross income to local churches/temples, 0gp-1gp/person/year
Festivals & Alms: 5% of income, 0.5gp/person/year
Urban Investment
It takes 1 year to create a new settlement at a suitable locale. Once created, the settlement maximum population figure is added to the maximum population figures above, so eg +30% annual growth requires a population fewer than 20 above the numbers below. Furthermore, after 1 year population is attracted to develop a number of surrounding rural manors, which may potentially be ruled and taxed.
Investment Additional Maximum Population Settlement Area/Surrounding Manors (of 1-3 sq m)
10,000gp +1000 Small Town (0.1 square mile)/6
25,000gp +3000 Town (0.25 square mile)/12
75,000gp +10000 Small City (0.5 square mile)/24
200,000gp +25000 Large City (1 square mile)/50
625,000gp +100000 Metropolis (2 square miles)/100
2,500,000gp +500000 Grand Metropolis (10 square miles)/200
Armies & War
Typical resources available to a ruler are:
1. The standing garrison forces of his domain and those of his vassals.
2. Any available mercenary companies. Short term hire is normally for 1 fighting season (3 months); with the first month in advance - pre-equipped and trained units hired for war cost 10 times standard soldier garrison wages, eg 40gp/month for heavy foot, 120gp/month for heavy horse - this does however cover all officers and NCOs.
3. A mass levy from the general population. Levy obligation is normally only 40 days per year, but levies will fight to protect their homeland from invasion.
Domain Type Levy % of Population
Wilderness 20%
Borderland 10%
Civilised 5%
In uncivilised regions Levy Clansmen/Tribesmen and Borderers may make effective light infantry; some urban centres also maintain good quality levy militia, but typical feudal rural peasantry make poor troops. Some rulers maintain tax-exempt Yeomanry under their protection as specialised levy troops, eg longbowmen and billmen. These are required to maintain their own armaments, and are of similar quality to mercenary troops.
Quote from: S'mon;1127292Taking some good ideas from ACKS (which is heavily inspired by BECMI system), here's what I have currently:
Manors & Domains
High level Fighter Lords (level 9+) can extract 1gp/month from their domain, 12gp/year per resident in a freehold; for other rulers the typical income is 10gp/year gross income for a typical borderland manor.
New Manors
Initially attract freeholders on a manor equal to 'Max Henchmen' score x10 and if there's plenty of land grow as per table below. Of course diplomacy and conquest can enable rapid growth...
For random potential areas optionally roll 3d4 for the likely gp/year reflecting resources; Fighter Lords add +2 to the roll. 10gp/year assumes a near optimum environment.
Lord's CHA: Initial Freeholders (Manor)
3-4: 10; Growth -3%
5-6: 20; Growth -2%
7-8: 30; Growth -1%
9-11: 40; Growth +0%
12-13: 50; Growth +0%
14: 60; Growth +0.5%
15: 70; Growth +1.5%
16: 80; Growth +2%
17: 100; Growth +3%
18: 150; Growth +4%
19+: 200; Growth +5%
A typical manor in settled farmlands is 640 acres, or 1 square mile. Maximum manor size in borderlands is roughly 2 miles diameter (one 2 mile hex), or just over 3 square miles, of which no more than 1 square mile is likely farmland. Exceptions apply to rulers of exceptional charisma - see below. Otherwise new manors must be created to administer the growing population.
Manor Current Population & Base Growth Rate (annual)
Under 20 +30%
20 +25%
40 +20%
60 +15%
80 +10%
100 +5%
125 +4%
150 +3%
200 +2%
300 +1% requires 1.5 square miles farmland
400 +0% " 2 sq m"
500 -1% " 2.5 sq m"
600 -2% " 3 sq m"
700 -3% " 3.5 sq m"
800 -4% " 4 sq m"
900+ -5% " 4.5 sq m"
A sub-infeudinated manor must have a lord or thane, preferably a henchman/retainer of the higher lord.
Resource Investment
For every 200gp spent on resource development, a manor will attract 1d10 more people. Growth limits still apply.
Typical Domain Costs
A typical domain has gross income of 10gp/person/year and expenses of 75% of income, leaving a net income of 2.5gp/person/year.
Garrison: 20% (civilised)-30% (borderland)-40% (wilderness) of income (2gp-4gp/person/year)
Stronghold Upkeep: 5% of stronghold cost per year; typical strongholds cost = annual domain income x2 (civilised) x3 (borderland) x4 (wilderness), so typically 10%-20% of income, 1-2gp/person/year
Salt Tax: 20% of gross income to higher lord, 2gp/person/year
Tithes: 0% (wilderness) -5% (borderland)-10% (civilised) of gross income to local churches/temples, 0gp-1gp/person/year
Festivals & Alms: 5% of income, 0.5gp/person/year
Urban Investment
It takes 1 year to create a new settlement at a suitable locale. Once created, the settlement maximum population figure is added to the maximum population figures above, so eg +30% annual growth requires a population fewer than 20 above the numbers below. Furthermore, after 1 year population is attracted to develop a number of surrounding rural manors, which may potentially be ruled and taxed.
Investment Additional Maximum Population Settlement Area/Surrounding Manors (of 1-3 sq m)
10,000gp +1000 Small Town (0.1 square mile)/6
25,000gp +3000 Town (0.25 square mile)/12
75,000gp +10000 Small City (0.5 square mile)/24
200,000gp +25000 Large City (1 square mile)/50
625,000gp +100000 Metropolis (2 square miles)/100
2,500,000gp +500000 Grand Metropolis (10 square miles)/200
Armies & War
Typical resources available to a ruler are:
1. The standing garrison forces of his domain and those of his vassals.
2. Any available mercenary companies. Short term hire is normally for 1 fighting season (3 months); with the first month in advance - pre-equipped and trained units hired for war cost 10 times standard soldier garrison wages, eg 40gp/month for heavy foot, 120gp/month for heavy horse - this does however cover all officers and NCOs.
3. A mass levy from the general population. Levy obligation is normally only 40 days per year, but levies will fight to protect their homeland from invasion.
Domain Type Levy % of Population
Wilderness 20%
Borderland 10%
Civilised 5%
In uncivilised regions Levy Clansmen/Tribesmen and Borderers may make effective light infantry; some urban centres also maintain good quality levy militia, but typical feudal rural peasantry make poor troops. Some rulers maintain tax-exempt Yeomanry under their protection as specialised levy troops, eg longbowmen and billmen. These are required to maintain their own armaments, and are of similar quality to mercenary troops.
I believe our DM used something like this, probably less detailed, no inherent population growth and CHA only affected loyalty, not numbers, of followers. But otherwise similar to this. Plus the D&D price lists, for things like castle components, ships etc.
I'm quite partial to the AiME rules given that they have the separation between the Adventuring Phase and the Fellowship Phase. During the Fellowship phase you accomplish various Undertakings and domain management is a choice. It's actually a pretty elegant way to have someone who wants to be the wandering Dunadan playing alongside someone who wants to be King of the Woodsmen and someone else who wants to run an Inn.