STABILITY

[Talinie & NIT/TD (Linde)]

OoC:

Example:

Domain X
Alignment:  Lawful Good
Size:  Large
Type:  Composite (Landed & Temple)

Under the rules in Regent Guide v.3.5 Draft 2.20, Domain X has maximum stability of 3; minimum stability of –3; and ASI threshold of 2.

Under the rules in Regent Guide v.3.5 Draft 2.25, Domain X (effectively) has maximum stability of 2; minimum stability of –4; and ASI threshold of 1.

Under the rules in STABILITY — Domain Alignment/Size/Types & Annual Stability Increase, Domain X has maximum stability of 5; minimum stability of –5; and ASI threshold of 0.

This example is only true for a limited BS and holding level. The premise to compare the proposal here and 2.25 should be that the domains you look at are the same domain. What is the domain had 31 holdings and the regent had a bs of 20?
Large by your definition but small by Bjψrns.

OoC:

According to the alternative method in Draft 2.25 (in which the bloodline score of a regent is relevant), a domain, whose regent has a bloodline score of 20, is apparently large (stability-wise) at 21,—and also at 31,—province/holding levels.

If you took a moment to read the final paragraph, you would note that: "Small and tiny are unchanged; the only effect of a strong bloodline is increasing the penalty threshold."
Small and tiny are unchanged! So tiny would always be 0-20, small would always be 21-40.
To further underline that fact Bjψrn even wrote that it is only the penalty threshold that is increased. So the smallest possible large domain would be 41 holdings.

That said, you gain enough benefit from a large BS already and as such I don't see the point in linking yet another bonus to BS.

OoC:

According to the alternative method in Draft 2.25 (in which the bloodline score of a regent is relevant), the tiny and small ranges are apparently unchanged.  However, a domain, whose regent has a bloodline score of 20,—even though tiny (stability-wise) at 20 province/holding levels,—is apparently large (stability-wise) at 21 province/holding levels.

The statement that tiny and small are unchanged is a specific exception to the optional general rule that large start at BS + 1

A regent with BS 30 would have the following domain size ranges, when taking that exception into account:
Tiny: 0-20
Small:20-40
Large:41-69 (it would start at 31 had it not been for the exception)
Huge: 70+

A regent with BS 11 would have the following domain size ranges, when taking the exception into account:
Tiny: 0-20
Small:20-40
Large:41-50 (it would start at 12 had it not been for the exception)
Huge: 51+

[Talinie & NIT/TD (Linde)]

As you can see the only effect of a larger BS in my examples are to increase the penalty threshold. In perfect compliance with RG 2.25: "the only effect of a strong bloodline is increasing the penalty threshold."

[X-Points East]

OoC:

According to the alternative method in Draft 2.25 (in which the bloodline score of a regent is relevant), a domain, whose regent has a bloodline score of 20, is apparently large (stability-wise) at 21,—and also at 31,—province/holding levels.

OoC:

According to the alternative method in Draft 2.25 (in which the bloodline score of a regent is relevant), the tiny and small ranges are apparently unchanged.  However, a domain, whose regent has a bloodline score of 20,—even though tiny (stability-wise) at 20 province/holding levels,—is apparently large (stability-wise) at 21 province/holding levels.

OoC:

Here follows a quote from Regent Guide v.3.5 Draft 2.25 (italics in original):  "Alternatively the DM can set Large size as one greater than your BS. Huge would then be your BS +40."  This quoted passage is a clear statement with an apparent meaning.  However, the clear statement is succeeded by text, which can be interpreted in multiple ways and the meaning of which is not apparent.  For reference, here follows the succeeding text in the same Draft 2.25 (italics in original):  "Small and tiny are unchanged; the only effect of a strong bloodline is increasing the penalty threshold."  Perhaps the succeeding text indicates, explanatorily, how to treat domains, with levels under bloodline-score-plus-one; or perhaps the succeeding text indicates that the bloodline-score-plus-one rule only takes effect above some number of levels.  In the absence of clarity with respect to the succeeding text, though, at least the initially quoted passage (to repeat, "Alternatively the DM can set Large size as one greater than your BS. Huge would then be your BS +40.") has an apparent meaning, in and of itself.

[Ruideside/OM (RP)]

Which is modified by the next sentence.

[X-Points East]

OoC:

STABILITY

Optional Suggestion:

Base Stability

Base stability can never fall below –5 or rise above +5.

Stability:  Domain Size

TINY — relevant levels less than or equal to 25% of regent's bloodline score
SMALL — relevant levels greater than 25% and less than or equal to 75% of regent's bloodline score
MEDIUM — relevant levels greater than 75% and less than or equal to 150% of regent's bloodline score
LARGE — relevant levels greater than 150% and less than or equal to 250% of regent's bloodline score
HUGE — relevant levels greater than 250% of regent's bloodline score

[[[Note:  In this context, province, law, manor, temple, guild, and source levels are relevant, whilst trade levels are irrelevant.]]]

Annual Stability Increase

A.S.I. THRESHOLDS	LG Alignment	LN/NG Alignment	LE/TN/CG Alignment	NE/CN Alignment	CE Alignment
Tiny Domain	+4	+3	+2	+1	+0
Small Domain	+3	+2	+1	+0	–1
Medium Domain	+2	+1	+0	–1	–2
Large Domain	+1	+0	–1	–2	–3
Huge Domain	+0	–1	–2	–3	–4

[Talinie & NIT/TD (Linde)]

OoC:

STABILITY — Domain Alignment/Size/Types & Annual Stability Increase

Optional Suggestion:

Base Stability

Base stability can never fall below –5 or rise above +5.

Stability:  Domain Size

TINY — relevant levels less than or equal to 25% of regent's bloodline score
SMALL — relevant levels greater than 25% and less than or equal to 75% of regent's bloodline score
MEDIUM — relevant levels greater than 75% and less than or equal to 150% of regent's bloodline score
LARGE — relevant levels greater than 150% and less than or equal to 250% of regent's bloodline score
HUGE — relevant levels greater than 250% of regent's bloodline score

[[[Note:  In this context, province, law, manor, temple, guild, and source levels are relevant, whilst trade levels are irrelevant.]]]

Annual Stability Increase

A.S.I. THRESHOLDS	LG Alignment	LN/NG Alignment	LE/TN/CG Alignment	NE/CN Alignment	CE Alignment
Tiny Domain	+4	+3	+2	+1	+0
Small Domain	+3	+2	+1	+0	–1
Medium Domain	+2	+1	+0	–1	–2
Large Domain	+1	+0	–1	–2	–3
Huge Domain	+0	–1	–2	–3	–4

I don't know the BS of the regents in RoE3, but I would wager that the average is under 40 in most birthright games.

I can't see what this option will bring to the game except another variable that players and gm have to keep track of. Sure P&H can have a formula that handles the math, but it is IMO creating complications and changes with no discernible benefit.


This option is harsher on small and tiny realms than how I - and everyone else who have commented - read standard and options in 2.25. Are small and tiny domains in need of a nerf?

This option would make any domain who has a ruler with BS over 40, who also has a domain over 100% of his BS in holdings stronger than 2.25 base and options. Are regents with BS over 40 with sizable domains in need of a power boost?

Brandon, I would love reasons to follow your proposals, you might have thought of something I have not! But as far as I can see all you want to do is tie all domain sizes proportionally to BS, just for the sake of keeping proportions. Do you have another reason?

If you truly feel that the option in 2.25 allow for large domains at 21 holdings if a regent is at BS 20, then the way I would fix that is to amend the last sentence in the option to read: "EXCEPTION: Small and tiny are unchanged; the only effect of a strong bloodline is increasing the penalty threshold." This would hopefully create a more uniform reading of the option.
And alternatively to include medium domains in the exception(As some read it like that too), but that would for most purposes void the option, since nearly no regents have more than 60 BS.