Representing the Factions/Sects in 3e/3.5

Really, you can honestly claim that everyone's in agreement with you?

This was my line of thinking when I was considering how to represent the factions without: a) giving away free powers, b) making any potential penalties outweigh the gains, and c) still providing a way to reward those who make sacrifices in the name of their beliefs. Only two options sprang to my mind: make them templates or represent factions by a combination of feat and prestige classes.

The problems with using feats and prestige classes that I came across were game balance and power gaming. While that's all well and good for many players, it is not representative of what Planescape is about. So, using what amounts to a cross between the rituals in Savage Species, templates, and 2e kits, I created the scalable templates with a way to increase/decrease the number of feats each level of belief within a faction a character may have in addition to having a XP (or Belief Point) cost. But the templates I created added the drawbacks from Planescape to 3e. Thus, even if you don't give players the bonuses that 2e factions offered, they still have the penalties that are generated from their beliefs.

This solved another problem for me: feats and prestige classes. With the feats now freed up from use to simulate the faction abilites by themselves, I was able to create them in a way that was similar to their general counterparts. Since the faction abilities did include some near-maigcal qualities in some instances, I looked at the metamagic feats and similar categories from Star Wars and Wheel of Time as a source of material to create specific feats for the factions.

While designing feats in this way, I wanted them to stand out as tweaks on the templated abilities as well as ways to improve the niche abilities of the 3 prestige classes I created for each faction. Thus, with 10 feats and 3 prestige classes per faction, I would have a large enough sampling of material in order to figure out what I might be missing over the course of a few gaming sessions.

Also, I wanted to design a way to preserve the 2e feel of the game with d20 mechanics for newcomers to Planescape. Especially those who were enamored with Torment.

Actually, my system imparts penalties in relation to the belief of the faction. As you go up through the ranks (e.g. from Namer to Factotum), the drawback penalties increase, but so do the benefits.

I see the system favored by Planewalker.com as akin to the American welfare system: all the benefits, none of the penalities from the previous way of doing things.

Wow...where do I begin to dismantle this diatribe?

I've posted my template system at least 3 times on the PW-Members and the PS mailing lists. The only true feed back I've gotten is that I don't know crap about 3e through the offhanded comments and general snubbing of my work by touting one system over another and disregarding merits of my work. It's okay if I write creative materials, so long as there's no game mechanics attached to them, appearently.

Every time I've introduced my system, I've gotten nothing but flack because of the way it works. When I first introduced it, I was told that it was pointless because Prestige Classes were better ways to represent faction power, because that's what 3e was about. I have a very long memory... Search the archives of the mailing lists to figure out where I'm comming from.

Should I quote the Player's Guide to Faerun?

"Regional feats represent particular strengths, talents, or characteristics of people who inhabit a region. These aren't bonus feats -- you can choose a regional feat only as one of your character's 1st level feat choices. you are not required to choose one if you don't want to. You can only select one regional feat, even if you would normally be entitled to multiple feat choices at 1st level." - page 8

Additionally, regions come with language & equipment choices. This means that, yes, you do have to spend a feat for that regional trait if you want your character to possess it.

Not only did you fail to understand my templates, you applied a faulty analogy to define the entirity of it. Drawbacks aren't merely political afflictions. They're based on the attitude that comes with the belief. Why are Takers hated so much? Because they're self-confidence flows over into arrogance, not to mention their supreme belief that they can have whatever they want and nobody will deny them their destinies.

Yeah, that's real authoritative compared to the Factol's Manifesto. Anarchists are more likely to get aid from another faction than their own. That's a severe drawback if you're exposed. There's no cohesion in the faction, meaning that if you're hip-deep in the crap you created, it's likely that nobody's going to pull out out. As for not owning businesses, there are two listed in Factol's Manifesto on p. 116-7: The Square Bar and The Secret Door. I suggest you use a more in-depth source for faction information.

See, what you do is fine for your own group, but what are you doing to promote the feel of the original setting for newcomers? By removing the penalties and the impact that belief has, you cheapen Planescape. Similar to how you cheapen the English language using Politically Corrupt non-words like "s/he" as they just annoy people, especially an English major. Your comments on how it's supposed to be role-playing is correct, but how can you stress that if all you do is offer feats and Prestige Classes and a brief description as to what they believe without the ramifications of those beliefs? You haven't answered that question. You've just waxed poetic as to how Planescape is about role-playing and de-emphasizes combat. I'm aware of what Planescape is, as well as the mechanics of d20. But if you ignore Star Wars, then I can see your argument from such a narrow perspective. But you can't ignore it because it is d20, was written by WotC, and has not only had impact on 3.5 revisions, but also was one of the sources for Unearthed Arcana.

Actually, feats are not liked by everyone, especially those who can't stand d20. Being that they are a core aspect of d20, they lose their appeal as a way to make a concept like "philosophy matters" a viable way to approach game mechanics because, well, everyone has access to feats so long as they gain character levels. Even commoners have access to feats. The only way to gain metamagic feats is to be able to cast spells, which means you have to take levels in a spellcasting class. This is a hell of a sacrifice just to have access to some feats. But even here, taking a level in the class allows the character to access the same types of feats all spellcasters have available.

Divine feats work in the same way. You just need to have access to divine magic in order to take the feats, provided you meet the feat requirements attached to said feats. The same can be said about Ancestor feats in OA. That book even goes so far as to force you to choose a clan (and thus gain a "class" skill and favored class for that clan) or go clanless (and gain no such benefits). Ghostwalk introduces Ghost, Corrupter, Haunt, Poltergeist, and the like as feat tags. These require levels as a ghost of one sort or another. The XPH has Psionic & Metapsionic as tags. Urban Arcana requires you to choose a feat called Arcane Skills in order to access skills classified under the same name.

My templates do the same, but allow all species to participate without buying class levels, feat selections to gain access, or limiting their role in the setting for not chosing to belong. That's the rub your system leaves with me. Benefits are plentiful, but penalties in mechanics are nonexistant.

Yes, how I forgot that I'm supposed to ignore the factions that no longer exist. I'm also supposed to I guess forget that some people refuse to change, because that's what free will allows for. I'm also supposed to ignore the mechanic that if you no longer qualify for a feat, you can't use it and you can't trade it. That's right, I forgot that I'm not supposed to have any disintergrated factions running about with their prestige classes and feats from the nonexistant faction. They're magically given new feats and the like, or all of those people with the exception of a select few, have been swallowed up by the Great Wheel because the new rules system made them obsolete.

And how elitist of us to assume that people who come here will own all the books. Or, they'll want to play in the post-FW era. That's why we're ignoring those campaigns, right? Because they don't fit in with the agenda of this site and the people making the decisions for what gets done and for whom. Forget those who might want to play Planescape if they didn't buy the books when it was out, it's not our job to attract new blood into the setting or the hobby. What was I thinking when I set out to design a compromised system that could be tailored for everyone's enjoyment, old hands and new alike? After all, we all know what the beliefs of the factions are, right? We all play the same campaign, don't we?

In all the rush to create a transition for old hands to the new system, we're supposed to leave everyone else behind. We shouldn't have a base to work from that extends before the Faction War, because that's a waste of time and nobody's going to want to see a return of the original 15, are they? After all, we've all played through FW, haven't we? I'm sorry, some of us haven't had the opportunity to get a group together to play the setting we enjoy so much. I forgot that they don't matter either, even if they've been in the community since '98. Those people without gaming groups or websites and the resources to build a community should be marginalized because they're not important to the continuance of the setting or for finding new blood.

I know what this community produces, I am a part of it. Take you own advice and watch the accuations. Also, watch your assumptions that we're only here to cater to the dedicated fans from 2e. Last time I checked, this hobby is dying because of such assumptions that we're only here for our experienced fellows.

I never said feats are illogical. I said that they're limited. You need to re-examine my words. You ask me to give something a try when it doesn't capture the feel of the original setting. That's very condescending of you.

Your words speak for themselves in this regard. What you call reasonable is very condescending and arrogant in its assumption that this is what the whole community wants and that we shouldn't worry about new players who would wonder what the Godsmen and Mercykillers were about. I say arrogant and condescending because you're making the choice for them by ignoring the potential gold mine of material the original setting left us but has yet to be used by anyone for the new blood. Where's the story continuity? Where's the broken remnants of factions long thought dead? Even 2e showed us the potential there with groups such as the Incantifiers. I've examined the PS3e rules with an objective and critical eye. It fails to uphold Planescape's potential for old and new gamers alike by the designer's disregard for the system.

No level-dependent aspects, and I'll post it after I respond so you can see.

The material's in e-mails that I've posted, not files uploaded. This work spans 2-3 years.

I never said I despised d20. I said I despised PS3e as it stands. As for the original 15, I intend to have them survive in some form after I run a group through FW. Why ignore those whould would still support a broken faction? Wouldn't they still have their beliefs and all the abilities that go with them? I say yes.

Like it or not, the correct term is "he," "him," or "man." It comes from the German "mann," which simply means "one" in English. I don't make ther rules for the language, I just enforce them as a writer.

My system is nothing like the "official" version. My system retains as much of the feel of PS as possible.

Have you ever designed a game for someone else to play?

Answer that question fist, and I'll answer yours in great detail.

I'm going to post something I wrote for a contract I competed for to illustrate my point. This is a piece that requires some final editing to clean up a few errors. What I ask from anyone who reads the sample chapter and Outline is whether or not I got the contract.

Chapter 1: Strongholds

Every stronghold, regardless of shape and size, is an enduring symbol of power and wealth. Simply stating that a stronghold is powerful or wealthy, however, does not invest in it strength of purpose.

The symbolic might of a stronghold is developed over time. A new fortress on the edge of civilization is little more than a collection of stone buildings behind a wall until it’s proven itself useful when an invasion assaults its walls. People aren’t filled with dread and awe by something that’s never been tested. Citizens of a benevolent empire aren’t confident about a palisade out along the frontier’s edge unless they know it keeps the barbaric hordes at bay.

So, how does a stronghold gain a reputation? A stronghold first is recognized as a landmark. Its proximity to civilization will add to or detract from its fame. Whereas a stronghold in the middle of nowhere can only gain a reputation through a considerable historical event, a stronghold near a settlement is readily recognized despite a lack of significant events occurring there. In addition, the disposition and culture of the stronghold’s main residents can help form a reputation that precedes them.

The combined effect of these aspects is powerful, and can thus be a bit overwhelming to many a game master whose only concern is providing a captivating setting for his players. It is understandable that many of the concepts described in the preceding paragraphs may seem stuffed with information. However, by the time you finish reading this chapter, you will have a clear concept of how to kindle your player’s imaginations enough to create exactly the setting you desire.

The above are actually just basic considerations for creating a structure that will serve as more than just a passing landmark in an otherwise unmemorable stretch of ground. Unless you want your stronghold to be nondescript, you’ll want to know more about how the fortress works, from construction and upkeep to staffing needs and survivability in an all-out siege. It’s the small details that reveal most of the personality of your stronghold. The more you add, the more alive and important it will feel to the players.

The generalizations in this chapter are the groundwork, so to speak, for the specifics upon which each stronghold is based. With the basics firmly in mind, you will be able to answer the questions necessary to make any fortification fit into your campaign without trouble.

What is a Stronghold?

You may believe this question to be rhetorical. In truth, anything can be considered a stronghold in a fantasy setting. Unfortunately, taking such a broad view would only confuse the subject even more. A stronghold for the purpose of this book is any building or series of buildings consisting of mundane materials engineered for protection from an attack. The reason for this distinction is due to the fact that while magic may be plentiful in a setting, most stronghold builders can’t afford to enchant a structure down to the last brick.

Because defense is an edge in a world where fantastic creatures roam, a sturdy wall is just as valuable as a magical shield. A good tactician with a handful of soldiers and a sturdy defensive barrier can repel an invading force with greater numbers. It is for this reason that strongholds are defined in terms of mundane materials rather than a series of enchantments. Though magic is a welcomed relief on both sides of the battlefield, engineers plan strongholds with the assumption that magic may not be available to use in the event of an attack.

What Constitutes a Stronghold?

As mentioned above, many buildings can comprise a stronghold. However, all strongholds share specific qualities. The chapters that follow break the structures down into the general categories they appear in among fantasy gaming settings. While this chapter will help you determine what it is you want your stronghold to accomplish, the remainder of the book will help you choose the right stronghold for the job. Used in tandem, this chapter and at least one other should stimulate your imagination to create the perfect stronghold for your game.

While there is nothing wrong with the example structures as presented in their respective chapters, they are a far cry from being the ideal for any given situation. So-called “cookie cutter” strongholds only work if you have an identifying reason for the consistent use of a layout. Such an identifying reason would be a proven design that optimizes the structure’s purpose within the terrain where it’s located. An example would be a series of cavalry posts along a border that runs through a plain. Soldiers from one stronghold would be able to defend an identical one with little trouble.

Types of Strongholds

This book describes nine broad categories of strongholds. Each represents a level of security, the number of people one would be designed to protect, and a certain strength of defense. Any given stronghold will have a relative value proportionate in the aforementioned areas as you progress from least to greatest security. What follows below are brief descriptions of the categories and their use.

The fortified manor house is the dwelling of a wealthy individual, usually from the non-noble aristocracy, who possibly has a few enemies. The manor house itself is designed to give the resident privacy but its defensive capabilities are mainly to keep unwanted guests out.

Moat houses are similar in many ways to the fortified manor house with the exception of their defensive structuring. Moat houses incorporate the terrain as an element of defense by using natural or manmade waterways to hold the outside world at a distance.

Towers are normally used as a means to increase how far a sentry can see. They are also the iconic structure wizards make their homes. Though strong and sturdy, towers aren’t meant to keep forces at bay for lengthy durations.

Fortresses are large outposts. Often, they are depicted as the homes of warlords and dictators. Fortresses serve as homes for nobles in embattled lands as well as regional centers of military or governmental might. Regardless of who controls a fortress, the point is clear: it holds a sizable fighting force, if not an army. Two derivatives of a fortress are the mott-and-bailey fortress and the Vauban fortification. Due to the differences in their construction, these two types of fortresses have their own chapters.

Finally, there is the castle. In terms of fantasy settings, the castle is the ultimate symbol of regional power. In addition to being a focus of governmental power, the castle is also the symbol of a region’s military might. Castles are ranked in terms of the number of walls that surround or are attached to the castle itself. The more concentric walls, the greater the castle’s defenses as well as its power. Castles are thus classified as single-, double-, or triple-walled castles.

Developing a Stronghold’s Personality

At first glance, a stronghold may seem to be little more than a collection of raw materials fashioned into a shelter. The truth is that all buildings have a personality. From the building’s design to its actual function, a stronghold has an aura that reveals how a viewer feels about it. You don’t think about it on a conscious level, but you do take away an impression of a building based on its location, shape, and (if you’ve been inside) its accommodations.

This section provides you with a rough guide of how to use the stronghold’s location, structure, and accommodations as a way to define its personality. Please note that while these generalizations are based on the average, they are by no means meant to be restrictive in how you wish to present a stronghold. In fact, any deviation from the “norm” will only add to the impact the structure has on the players.

Location
It’s true that where we live has a strong bearing on our personalities. The landscape shapes how open or closed we are to outsiders as well as how receptive we are to our neighbors. The same holds true for buildings. The design of a building has an impact on the perception of the building’s personality, but it’s only when everything is taken in consideration. This goes beyond the comparison of a low-peaked roof to a steep roof in a region with inclement weather.

For an example, a low, sinuous keep on the frigid reaches of a kingdom’s northern taiga will elicit a distinctly different impression than a bulky one that overshadows the same frigid terrain. The first leads one to believe that the keep is withdrawn and secretive while the latter gives the impression of projected strength and an air of confident domination. The taller the structure, the more imposing it is meant to be. The length/width dimensions provide the degree of openness, so long as the dimensions are on a 1:1 ratio (to be discussed later). Thus, the former structure feels like a cold and hostile snake while the latter gives the impression of supreme confidence (some may say arrogance) in its own strength while serving as a beacon for all in the area that safety is within reach.

Compare then, the same structures in a jungle. The sinuous keep will still have the feeling of a snake slithering along the ground, but fits in more with the landscape because vegetation is more likely to interfere with a taller keep. The larger structure appears to be entrapped by the jungle canopy. The upper levels of the jungle vegetation mayalso serve as a method to threaten to eventually topple the taller structures if the flora isn’t kept at bay.

It’s clear through these comparisons that the environment plays a large role in the way we view a structure and assign it a personality. But what role does elevation play? The two examples above illustrated the concepts of strongholds in temperature extremes without considering the elevation of the structures. The question of elevation is similar in concept to temperature extremes, but it is more complicated than what you’d think on the surface of it.

Generally speaking, the prime location for any fortification is the highest point in the region. The structure itself can be of any height, but the high ground is the key to defense of the stronghold. At least, this is the theory. While it’s true more often than not, high ground isn’t always the most desirable location for a fortification. If you placed a stronghold in a relatively inaccessible locale, chances are that the people it’s meant to protect will find it hard to access it as well. And if the local populace can’t reach the shield of the land, chances are that those defenders will be hard pressed to meet any invasion forces before substantial damage has been caused in the lowlands.

In order to combat such problems, the fort occupying the highest point will serve as the regional capitol as well as the primary lookout point that warns other fortifications in the region that there are invaders in the area. To combat discrepancies of distance, the main fortress will need several smaller garrisons spread throughout the area to govern defense in the lowlands. The high ground in this example gives the military the ability to signal trouble in the area to the garrisons. Such a setup allows for the main forces in the capitol stronghold enough time to reach the invading force to stiffen and reinforce the soldiers already on the ground.

But this is not always the ideal setup. If the highest point is in a location that is unable to sustain a community, then it is as much a liability as it may be an advantage. Should there be a resource of importance to the kingdom, then it is most likely that the stronghold will be placed in a more suitable location in relation to the resource. The best location for such defense will be as close to the resource as physically possible.

However, unless there’s some overriding circumstance, a stronghold will never be placed at the lowest point. By placing a fortification in the depths of a ravine, the builder of such a structure is foolhardy in believing that it’s protected from attacks. All one would need to do is roll a few boulders down onto the structure to destroy it. If you have sufficient cover (say a jungle), then you’d be at an advantage. The sacrifice of the high ground in such a case is in return for the benefit of concealment. In other words, if you can’t see the stronghold, then it doesn’t really exist until you run into it.

Structure
As implied in the preceding section, the structure of a stronghold is a major part of the building’s personality. A fortified manor house on a plain gives the feeling that it’s a farmer’s residence in a hostile area. An imperial palace in the same locale denotes the heartland of an empire. If a wizard’s tower sat on the site instead, it would project an image of someone who prefers isolation and wishes to keep his privacy.

All three structures provide the beginnings of a back story. In the manor house, a minor noble, rich farmer, or wealthy merchant could potentially live in an idyllic setting. The spacious grounds of an imperial palace suggest that a metropolis surrounds the stronghold and may welcome trade. The wizard’s tower makes one pause before venturing deeper into the plains surrounding the structure. Note that in this location, it is the structure rather than the environment that makes the impression. This shouldn’t be confused with the effect the environment has on the structure. It is important to keep in mind that both elements go hand-in-hand.

Since it is now established that the type of structure plays a significant part in developing a stronghold’s personality, what about its size? As mentioned in the preceding section, the linear dimensions of a stronghold play an important, often subconscious role in how the structure affects its inhabitants and those who view it from afar. Height of a stronghold is a good indicator of how well the builder of the structure wants it to be seen. The taller a stronghold is, the greater its presence is meant to be felt. Thus, the type of stronghold is modified by its dimensions.

Developing a Perception of a Stronghold

Without knowing what is inside a stronghold, its location and physical aspects provide only a superficial perception of that stronghold’s personality. Every aspect of developing a stronghold’s personality and purpose as stated previously in this chapter is from the point of view of a new occupant of that stronghold. To develop the viewpoint of someone from the outside, you sue the came concepts but exclude the interior of the stronghold.

The perception derived from a structure’s personality and purpose is directly affected by the nearest population center. Unlike personality and purpose, the perception of these aspects can vary greatly. On one side, you have the view from the invader who sees the structure as a shield for the region. On the other you have the view from the local populace; who may know the true function of the stronghold but may experience something entirely different. For example, the stronghold may be for their protection, but depending on the situation, the locals may get the cold shoulder – or worse – from the soldiers garrisoned nearby.

Location

This aspect of a stronghold is most important to someone who wants to invade it. While the locals may have a problem with the idea that the inhabitants of the nearby stronghold can anonymously spy on them from their lofty vantage point, chances are more likely that they see the stronghold as their protector. Or, if the fortress is controlled by a ruthless tyrant, it may be the symbol of evil appearing as a vulture crouched on a cliff watching its prey become weaker. From a rival military’s point of view, however, location has an immediate and practical use. It defines the advantages and disadvantages of the stronghold and gives the planners of an assault a concept of what strategy they would need to employ.

The proximity of a stronghold to civilization or the resource it is meant to protect also projects an image. Depending on the point of view, a stronghold placed far from what it is intended to defend can be seen to serve as a screen to delay reaching the object in question, or the object may be perceived as inconsequential. Strongholds that are surrounded by towns may have once been border guards or regional law enforcement, but have since attracted settlers who wished to provide one service or another to the fortification only to accrete more citizens wishing to start an enterprise dealing with the stronghold. The return for the citizens is that they live in the shadow of their protectors. This allows them a certain level of security that wilderness settlements without such structures lack.

However, should the structure lie just outside of a settlement, the perception from the outside is that it is either the culture doesn’t tolerate soldiers within civilized areas or that the region was conquered by some other invader. A stronghold set off center leads one to believe that the aforementioned attitudes have been changed and the local populace has come to embrace the stronghold. Only through closer inspection would the local view of the stronghold be revealed to foreigners.

Fortified manor houses, conversely, signify not a military presence, but that of a minor noble or successful merchant. Indeed, such structures are prime targets for marauders, one of the reasons that they have some form of protection. A major military force would generally pass by such a “fortification” that in their point of view is of little consequence. This is one of the reasons why the previous section spoke of conventionality and the façade. The estate of some petty merchant may come in handy at some point, but it is more hassle than it’s worth at the outset. How the locals would view the owner of such an estate depends on his reputation.

Finally, the larger and/or more heavily fortified a stronghold is, the more important the region, resource, or settlement is to the governing body. There is a direct correlation between this and the number of soldiers such a stronghold can hold or repel. The locals would definitely take notice of this, especially if the stronghold is controlled by an occupying force. The larger the structure is, the more support it needs in terms of resources to sustain it. This will draw merchants and send rival militaries in search of the stronghold’s supply routes in order to pinch them.

Structure

The shape of the stronghold is more prominent to the perception of outsiders than its classification. Yes, the leader of an army determined to assault a stronghold will take its size and layout into consideration, but when it comes to actually laying siege to the structure, the military commander will give the shape more weight than any other aspect because he commander will be forced to consider how it functions to help the occupants repel an assault. For the nonmilitary mind, the shape of a stronghold will only give pause if it is aesthetically unusual. The average person will walk away with little change to their expected impression of the stronghold unless it has features that make it look disconcerting (spikes, horrific carvings, etc.)

There is little chance that a structure’s shape will significantly impact its perception unless it contains unique design features. These features are what stand out in the minds of soldiers and laypeople alike. The designs need not be functional for physical defense, but they will have a psychological impact. The more unusual a shape is, the more a military commander must spend time figuring out how it helps the stronghold. For the civilian, the disconcerting appearance of a stronghold signifies either that an evil force is venerated within or that the structure that would be feared by the occupant’s enemies.

Nothing of the general layout should overpower the stronghold to the point that its structural classification is ignored. A tower, no matter how scary looking, is still a tower. The shape of the stronghold and its appearance carry it only so far without the structure. Just as the last two paragraphs were placed before this point, so too does the appearance register an impression first.

Your stronghold will always be more important than the decorations. The problem is that the sentient mind doesn’t perceive it in such stark terms. The commoners living in the shadow of a stronghold are much more amenable to a structure with symbols that show it as a guardian of the people, but the size proves just how valued they are. The reverse holds true with a structure covered in symbols of the worst fears of the culture. Then again, the reputations within the occupants in the stronghold could trounce all of this.

In retrospect, all elements of the structure should be combined to give an overall perception from an outsider’s point of view. With all the information you have at your fingertips from developing the stronghold, this may seem like a daunting task. To make it easier for you to establish a perception without telling the players how their characters feel, start with the look of the place, its size, and then its type. The players may infer more from this, which may work in favor of your campaign.

Purpose

The purpose of a stronghold may not be readily apparent to outsiders or commoners. Using the guidelines described above, most outsiders will theorize the stronghold’s purpose while the commoners will have a generalized view of the place (beneficial, oppressive, etc.). All sorts of strange notions may come from such inference, especially if your stronghold goes against type. The outsider may give it a military quality you know it clearly lacks while the commoners may have foolish rumors they trade amongst themselves. A good example of the latter would be the Bastille which was perceived as a symbol of the corruption of the French ruling class despite its true nature as a prison.

A more accurate perception can be generated by knowing the intended purpose of the stronghold. This is a situation you would likely encounter along the border of two long-standing enemies. The offensive and defensive capacities of each military have long since been understood by each side. However, this does not mean that they are locked into a static situation where the results will always come out in a predictable fashion.

Recall from the section above about using variations on a stronghold’s purpose through layout and accommodations how subtle changes can cause unexpected leverage against one’s attacker. Something to include in this line of thought is the staffing of the stronghold. The types of soldiers may and usually do change over time. Because of this, an enemy force would be foolhardy to expect the same counterattack during successive attempts at invasion. The result is a deadly game of prodding the defenses for a weak spot and attempting to predict the next set of changes.

Imagine how such changes would play upon the minds of commoners. Rumors of all sorts of events would be the talk of the local communities. Each such rumor could be the trigger point to an adventure. Chances are quite high that even if the players aren’t directly involved, someone’s going to use changes in the guard to their advantage. The stirrings of rebellion could be in the wind amongst the talk of fears of another invasion. And the perception of the stronghold’s purpose could shift once again.

Personality

Of all the qualities that affect the perception of a stronghold by outsiders, the personality of the structure (as viewed from the inside) is the least likely to be noticeable to anyone but the local populace. It is mentioned here because characters are likely to feel the effects of the reactions between the locals and the stronghold’s inhabitants. The perception is most likely going to color how the characters react to the stronghold until they know the truth of the situation. Thus, this is a tool for you to use to develop a web of intrigue in your campaign that the characters may be forced to unravel.

The colorization of a stronghold’s persona from an outside source serves two purposes. First, it allows the players to gauge the feelings of the public’s view on the government (local or otherwise). Second, it allows you the opportunity to mislead the sympathies of the players until the truth of a situation is revealed. As some may argue this is dishonest and not fitting for a role-playing game, we must point out that mysteries employ this technique with great frequency.

Advantages and Disadvantages

There is no such thing as a perfect defense. Strongholds are built with key advantages to maximize their purpose. Unfortunately, this means that strongholds must be deficient in other areas. The advantages and disadvantages that define a structure are part of the specialization that comes with a having purpose. The earlier example of a tower not being the ideal structure for cavalry falls under this heading. The tower’s height is its main advantage. It allows the occupants to spot targets from a distance far greater than would be possible for shorter structures. However, it does not provide adequate space for a stable or room to allow the horses to sprint out of the main entrance.

Advantages and disadvantages of stronghold technology make use of the three key factors you’ve become accustomed to seeing. The rules governing what gives boons and detriments to fortifications are location, structure, and accommodations. These are always the overriding factors that receive top priority in our consideration of strongholds.

Location

Would you put a stronghold on top of a cliff or at the base of one? Would you put a lookout tower at the bottom of a valley? Chances are you wouldn’t place your stronghold at the base of a cliff because someone could then rain heavy objects down onto it. Rather you’d place it on top of the cliff so you could order troops to roll objects down onto your enemies. The tower in the valley would be highly impractical as a lookout since the surrounding terrain is at a higher elevation. A wizard, however, may put a tower in a valley to keep it isolated and well warded with enchantments.

But unless you’re employing a great deal of magical defenses, you shouldn’t think in terms of how can you break the rules. Rather, you should be using the viewpoint of a general who has no magical talent at his disposal. In fact, many magically enhanced strongholds will merge the magical with the mundane to give the fortification a greater chance at survival. After all, a few magical effects that dispel or disrupt a stronghold’s magical defenses could render its unique locale a liability. In this way, you should give pause to any structure that goes against the conventional.

Location plays a heavy factor in the type of stronghold you use in other ways as well. You should avoid creating any stronghold that relies on artificial means to allow it to exist. The chink in the armor of such a stronghold could easily be exploited, rendering the structure defenseless and quickly kill the occupants. By artificial, we are referring to any method, magical or otherwise, that artificially sustains the stronghold in a region inhospitable to it or its inhabitants. This could be a castle for air-breathers at the bottom of an ocean, for example.

The vast spread of an imperial palace is best suited for a plain. But what if you don’t have any significant tract of flat land upon which to build the castle? The costs to level a large enough section of a mountain would be prohibitive. The alternative solution for such a structure is to have several outlying buildings on the surface of the mountain with the remainder of the fortification embedded within. Such a stronghold would be hard to overrun. The classical dwarven stronghold uses this model where a few keeps serve as or guard the entrance to the fortification and/or subterranean settlement.

Unless you want to spend extra time, money, and effort to build a stronghold in an area with limited space many regions will force you to reconsider what you build in that location. A castle in a forest or jungle would enjoy relative obscurity from the ground, but the area that must be carved out of the foliage allows it to be spotted from the air. The hole in the canopy alone stands out. Imagine how much more so a castle complete with spires thrusting above the canopy would be noticeable. Smaller structures would be better suited for such environments.

As you can see, not only is location an important factor in determining many aspects of a stronghold, it is also key in defining the qualities that will allow a specific category of strongholds to excel above others in a certain location. Also, the size of the structure will help or hinder it based upon the terrain where it’s situated. Location is by far the primary determinant of where a stronghold will go, what size it will be, and for what sorts of purposes it will have the greatest advantage (cavalry likes flat ground, artillery/archers have greater advantage from high ground, etc.).

Structure

Beyond the size of the structure, category of the structure plays a secondary role in determining the advantages and disadvantages of a stronghold. Each type of fortification comes with its own inherent set of benefits and pitfalls based upon the predominant purpose for building it. For instance, the fortified manor house is foremost a dwelling for the occupant with protection and privacy being ensured by its armored nature. A castle on the other hand serves not only as housing for a ruler, but it also serves as the seat of government, a garrison, and defensive structure. Depending on the government in question, all but a few areas of a castle are truly restricted from public access. Often a castle must be all things to all people.

The stronghold therefore, must be considered advantageous or not based on how well its structure fits against the background of the location. This is where form and function must agree as much as possible for the stronghold to be considered successful. To refer back to the illustration of the tower with cavalry again, this is extremely disadvantageous in that everything’s contained in one building. Without artificially controlling the issue of disease there’s a strong chance that both the occupants and the horses could become sick.

The only way a tower could become advantageous for such a use would require magical intervention. This is because of the inherent lack of open space needed to keep the stables away from the kitchen and sleeping quarters. To see this concept in action from a non-stronghold point of view, think about how a farm is designed. The animal pens are kept as far away from the bedrooms and kitchen as possible. Space is the premium that structures use to create the advantages and disadvantages that maximize the stronghold’s purpose. This is a fundamental underlying principle that will help you make your strongholds stand against a storyline that otherwise could be taken as preposterous.

Bigger is not always better in the world of strongholds. In fact, the larger a stronghold, the more problems it is likely to face. This is why few strongholds are large. Smaller strongholds are cheaper (individually), are constructed more quickly, and allow a string of fortifications to be set in a line. The distribution of strongholds in this fashion allows for a more equalized distribution of military power within a region. In some ways, you could view this in the same light as how modern police stations operate in large cities. You have a main headquarters, a few precincts, and kiosks to allow maximum coverage. In a fantasy setting this would be a castle, a few fortresses, and small keeps spread about in like fashion.

No matter which structures you choose to use for strongholds, you will want your nations to have more power concentrated in the interior of a nation rather than along its borders. The outlying regions may fall due to this style of defense, but as an invading force moves towards the heart of nation, it will face stiffer resistance. If you put everything along the borders, you run the risk of an enemy breaking through and facing weaker forces and overwhelming them. Vast curtain walls could help you keep invaders out for a while, but eventually some means will be found to circumvent a defense.

Accommodations

The advantages and disadvantages associated with a fortification’s accommodations come not just from what’s present, but how it is arranged. If you look at the structure of a modern house, for example, you’ll notice that the bedrooms are clustered together, the kitchen, family room, den, etc. are clustered in another region of the house with the bathroom located roughly between the two areas. The layout is effective because it minimizes its own disadvantages. A similar approach can be used with strongholds.

As with your modern dwellings, strongholds generally cluster various rooms together. The kitchen will have a pantry or storage room in close proximity. The stable will be placed on the opposite side of the building from the kitchen. Strongholds that have their own armories and smithies will normally see these two clustered together as well. These clusters allow disadvantages to be minimized as best as possible.

Following the clustering of like-themed rooms, the martial qualities of a stronghold will be similarly arranged. From the outer perimeter of a defensive barrier (such as a wall) to the offensive capabilities connected to the stronghold, there is a pattern that a stronghold follows. In fact, the defenses of a stronghold will be intertwined with the offensive. The crenellations along the wall are one such feature that illustrates this point. The raised portions of the crenellations provide cover while the open portions along the rampart provide the guards with a way to fend off attackers.

Towers incorporated into the curtain wall of a castle and stables with a straight line to the main gates also show how the accommodations can be arranged to give a greater edge to the advantages of a stronghold. The tower allows guards to spot an approaching army without leaving the lookout stranded. The wall prevents the army from overrunning the castle while the troops within prepare to counterattack from within. By having ample space to run straight towards the gates when open, cavalry can explode out of the castle at a dead run. This tactic allows them to function as shock troops.

The disadvantage to accommodations being place in groups comes when an attacking force breaks through a stronghold’s walls. The clusters allow a savvy commander to plan how a stronghold will be raided once its defenses are cracked. While laying siege to the stronghold, the same commander will probably be able to discern where to concentrate his resources to weaken the defenders of the stronghold. In the same token, this means that the maximization of the stronghold’s advantages will consequently leave certain regions at a disadvantage.

Strategy & Tactics of Strongholds

If it hasn’t been stressed enough, let us reiterate that each category of stronghold has its own unique strategy and tactics for conducting offensive and defensive maneuvers. It would therefore be impractical to attempt to detail strategies and tactics in this section. Also, it wouldn’t be wise to stress any generalities either. We must emphasize that the general strategy for each category does not take into account the structure’s layout. This is deliberate as the previous sections have detailed the generalities as much as possible concerning structures, layouts, and accommodations. When designing a stronghold, please refer to the category the structure belongs to in order to devise a feasible set of strategies and tactics for that particular fortification.

Construction

With the planning of a stronghold completed, the construction phase can begin. Building a stronghold is a relatively straightforward process. An engineer or two is necessary to oversee the process and ensure that the stronghold doesn’t end up lopsided or collapse after it’s built. Part of that also means that decisions must be made about the material used and whether any decorative features will be added to the building. Despite this, note that the times for construction do not correspond with historical equivalents. Such a model would leave the average castle far from complete during the span of an average-length campaign.

Costs for the construction of a stronghold are based on its size, the materials used, and whether any permanent features (sculptures, carvings, spikes, etc.) are incorporated into the final design. If a room is carved or excavated from the terrain, such as a mountain fortress or a cellar, you should be aware that the costs will increase by at least 3. The amount of material used for the walls of a room built 30 square feet by 10 feet tall and 1 foot thick walls is equal to 1,200 cubic feet of material. The same room carved from stone or excavated in some other way would equal 9,000 cubic feet of material. That’s more than seven times the material! Of course, if the structure is a mountain stronghold with subterranean features, then the stone can be used for the surface buildings. At an increase of 3x the cost, that’s a bargain.

The materials used in a structure are important in that they can affect how long it would take to build the stronghold as well as the cost. You may think that cutting costs and corners will help. When the stronghold is assaulted, you’ll know whether it was worth the savings. The survivability factor decreases significantly when you use materials softer than stone. On the other hand, if your strongholds greatest advantage is due to camouflage, it may be best to forego the heavy construction materials. If you can’t find the stronghold in the first place, then its camouflage makes up for the relatively lightly armed state.

Last, you should consider the occupants of the stronghold. The structure should be sized to accommodate the intended inhabitants. A gnome wouldn’t build a structure for himself on the scale necessary for a giant. The size of a stronghold and the costs of the components should be adjusted to the same scale. Thus, if a kitchen needs to be three times larger in every dimension, the costs should be 9 times those given for the example stronghold.

Infrastructure & Upkeep

The last feature to consider when a stronghold has been constructed is the infrastructure that will support it. This includes supply lines for consumables and other resources necessary to ensure the stronghold is able to do its job. Infrastructure is given in monthly increments for the amount of material needed to sustain the occupants and their various professions. If the infrastructure is somehow removed from the stronghold, as in a siege, there are problems for the occupants. The samples of the strongholds provided in each chapter will include information about how each is supported and the minimum infrastructure necessary for each stronghold to function as designed.

Maintenance requires a monthly stipend as well. The cost for maintenance runs the gamut for cleaning to inspections to repair work necessary to keep the building from crumbling. The upkeep is tedious work that remains in the background. In fact, the costs assume that the servants/staff are the ones who perform these functions. Skimp on the maintenance costs, however, and within a few months to a year, disadvantages as hindrance of movement within the stronghold to weakening of the walls themselves may appear.

A stronghold without an infrastructure to support it or the ability to maintain itself will soon be abandoned and left to fall into ruin. Many ancient ruins in your campaign may very well have fallen victim to this fate if they weren’t assaulted outright. Any ruins and the story of their fall are left to your imagination, whether it is the tragic tale of war, the consequence of a successful siege, or the failure to plan a workable stronghold.

Do you think I secured the contract?