The Hidden Elegance of ACKS...A Little TOO Hidden

Dude?

I claimed I bought the colour laser printer for productive purposes, but who am I kidding? It was originally for printing out colour images of monsters for RPG sessions.

I created a screen, too. I love having so many tables in one place so I don’t have to go looking them up over and over again.

I’m not the only economist! Huzzah!

I never realized we had so many actual economists in the community! That’s very cool, albeit intimidating.

I’m finishing up a double-major in creative writing and statistics this year, and then onward to a PHD in Stats eventually.

ACKS: The High IQ OSR game.

I was thinking ACKS: Economist-Tested, Statistician-Approved.

With branding like this, it’s no wonder we’re outselling D&D 5E 6 to 1*!

*According to a survey conduct among members of my weekly gaming group.

Well, that certainly begs the question: what am I doing here?

Wow…I have a new reason to want a chance to actually run or play ACKS…my IQ might rise!

People used to laugh at my undeveloped campaign world. I was ashamed to reveal my lack of economic coherency and demographics. Then I sent in the mail for Alex Macris’ Adventurer Conqueror King System. It made me such a complete specimen of a Judge that guys and gals can’t help but notice my perfectly trimmed hex maps and fully developed custom classes.

Mail for your own copy of the Adventurer Conqueror King System, and take you and your players from zeros to heroes!

I posted an article on my blog, in part with this thread in mind. I’d appreciate any feedback.
Http://free-strife.blogspot.com/2014/09/conquerors-and-kings.html

Most of the article is trying to rationalize a discrepancy that I don’t see. If the minimum domain size is 1 square mile, then there can obviously be multiple baronies in a single hex, regardless of whether 1 hex is the average domain size - about half of domains will be smaller than average. (Assuming that “average” means “median”. If it’s the mean domain size, then the majority of domains will be less than the “average” size to balance out the domains that are up closer to the 16-hex upper limit - a single 16-hex domain plus 32 half-hex domains work out to a mean domain size of 0.97 hexes.)

Regarding your final thoughts on building a stronghold and claiming a domain prior to 9th level, ACKS core explicitly covers that on page 134, under the heading “Establishing Strongholds Before 9th Level”. Also note that one of the examples on page 147 mentions the possibility of a 0-level son of a petty noble inheriting his father’s domain and how long it would take him to reach 1st level from the domain XP alone. There is no level limit on when you can rule a domain (other than your ability to hold on to it). As you theorized, the 9th level benefit is that, if you have a stronghold/tower/hideout/etc., you then gain followers. It’s not the ability to build a stronghold/tower/hideout/etc. in the first place.

The discrepancy I am trying to rationalize is the transition from domain to realm. A minimum domain size of 1 sq. mile implies nothing regarding the minimum size of a barony or how many baronies might exist in a 6 mile hex. A barony is a realm, so by definition has vassal domains as well as the personal domain of the baron. But the Titles of Nobility table says a barony has one domain and the various Realms tables in chapter 10 say a barony is a realm yet Realms and Vassals on page 130 defines a realm as multiple domains under one ruler. The wurm is eating its own tale.

Personal domains close to the 16 hex limit are the playgrounds of Dukes and Princes; if you compare the population limits of a realm that size against the personal domain population column on the Revenue by Realm table on 230. A large dukedom will have 200 or so baronies and a small principality will have more than 250. Those average to .57 and .501 hexes respectively. That will climb some with the personal domains of counts and marches but not enough to get to a 1 hex average.

The resolution that I will be staggering towards in follow up posts are some guidelines for domains smaller than baronies, modeled after the hundreds of Anglo-Saxon England or manors post Norman Conquest.

I did manage to jump back and forth from chapter 7 to chapter 10 and miss the section on page 134. Thanks for pointing that out to me. I’ll go back and revise the post to take that in to account.

As much as I hate replying to my own post, I did some reading of older threads on the general and questions fora and found references to an early draft of the core rules that did break down baronies to a 1/4 hex knight or manor level.

So I think the trouble I was having with domain/realm resolution are due to some artifacts of that earlier draft that didn’t get fully cleared in the final version. A barony is intended to be the smallest domain and the reference to it as a realm and to a domain size of 1 square mile are simple artifacts of a removed level of granularity.

Takes a load off my mind. Now I can go about adding in house rules for manors and knightly domains with an eye to valuing them for use as gifts and rewards for my players (and determining the xp reward for such a gift. Land is wealth and wealth is xp :slight_smile: ).

I “resolved” this unconsciously by reading “realm” as “one or more domains” rather than “multiple domains” - I wasn’t even aware that this varied from the literal text until you pointed it out here. So, as far as I’m concerned, a barony is a “realm” even if not subdivided. Also note that a village/town/city is effectively a domain unto itself[1], so a non-subdivided barony containing an urban settlement would also be a “realm” under the strict “more than one domain” reading of the term.

Land is wealth, sure, but wealth is not XP. Treasure is XP[2].

A case could be made for giving XP under the “Experience from Construction” rules on ACKS 146, but my impression is that this is intended to go only to the one who builds the stronghold, not to whoever happens to control it at the time:

  • The section is titled "Experience from Construction, not "from Owning Strongholds".
  • While the rule does state that you lose the construction XP if the stronghold is captured, it does not say anything about the XP being transferred to the captor.
  • The example I mentioned earlier about the 0-level son of a noble taking over the domain states that it will take some months for him to gather enough XP from domain income to reach level 1, not that he immediately becomes a level 4 Fighter when he assumes control of the 30kgp stronghold and gains 15000 XP along with it.

[1] “Once established, an urban settlement functions much like a separate domain, except that the adventurer can directly manage both his domain and the urban settlement within the domain.” (ACKS 133)

[2] “Characters do not earn treasure XP from wages earned or business transactions – this is not treasure recovered from an adventure.” (ACKS 113) I would also consider gifts to fall under this in general and, in particular, I would consider a “gift” in return for oaths of fealty and feudal obligations, to be a business transaction. Either way, no XP for it.

I give xp for rewards given by patrons of the PCs. I balance the value of the rewards against the treasure found on the adventure to keep it all around the 4/1 ration of treasure to xp from monster killing. Admittedly a table interpretation but I don’t really consider rewards for acts of bravery to be wages or business transactions, that’s too reductionist for my taste.

Preferences will, of course, vary.

It’s even more fun once you have PC patrons paying other PCs to clear hexes for them :stuck_out_tongue:

(Yes, awarding XP up to the 4:1 ratio for payments from a PC ruler to his PC subjects for work done was actually the simplest dirty monkeypatch solution to other, larger problems.)

So, if you accept that PCs can give other PCs XP by paying them for work done, where do you draw the line? I assume you wouldn’t allow a pair of starting fighters to reach level 14 by “paying each other” repeatedly (I give you my starting 100gp, you get 100 XP, then give it back so I gain 100 XP… Repeat 8500 times and we’re both level 14 fighters!)

Personally, I’ve held very strongly to ACKS 113’s statement that “Characters gain XP from treasure they recover from the dungeon or wilderness and bring back to civilization… Characters do not earn treasure XP from wages earned or business transactions – this is not treasure recovered from an adventure.” and ruled that any money which is not “treasure recovered from an adventure” gives no XP. Paying me 10kgp to clear a hex is all well and good, but I did not “recover [the 10kgp] from the dungeon or wilderness and bring [it] back to civilization”, so I get no XP from it.

None of this is to say that I think you’re doing it wrong, but you obviously draw the line between “XP-providing” and “non-XP-providing” gold in a different place than I do and I’m curious about where that is and why you put it there.