SIFRP’s “domains” – the lands of a particular House – are treated as if they are mostly monolithic (people will mostly be loyal to their Houses, and the Faith of the Seven isn’t a major power structure in Westeros), and the narrative of political conflict between Houses is handled on-camera in extended Intrigue scenes. Both games include domain management as a phase of gameplay, but they handle domain-level conflict in strikingly different ways. With the contention, violent and otherwise, between neighboring domains, it really is hard to avoid comparisons with SIFRP. In more than one of my settings I’ve considered emulating Birthright’s use of magical bloodlines. I appreciate the game embracing and enforcing its theme this deeply.
There are ways to go from commoner to noble, though they’re deliberately rare.
#BIRTHRIGHT CAMPAIGN SETTING MAP PC#
You could play a commoner and be part of a PC or NPC regent’s entourage, but Birthright doesn’t encourage that style of play anywhere near as much as SIFRP does. There are also some classes (wizard) and class abilities (Realm spells) that are off-limits to commoners. Without this power, most of the tasks of rulership are impossible and the domain would be easily overwhelmed by grasping neighbors. (“Regent” lets them dodge using king, queen, or any other rank name as their generic term there also a hazy implication that all of these regents are placeholders for a “true” monarch.) The setting not only embraces the divine right of kings, but doubles down: long ago the gods infused a limited set of mortals with their power, a power which is passed down through bloodlines. The setting famously sets itself apart by assuming that PCs are playing regents: nobility in direct control of a domain, religious sect, guild or cartel, or ley-line network. The setting-writers take a very high-level approach to setting presentation, which I want to talk about more in a minute the cultural notes come across heavily in the names and descriptions of domains, leaders, and organizations. These cultural connections aren’t 1:1, but they’re only lightly veiled.
#BIRTHRIGHT CAMPAIGN SETTING MAP HOW TO#
Now, this is applying the standards of setting design in 2013 to 1995 – in ’95 there was almost no internet, much less an industry-wide conversation on how to be less Euro-cis-male-centric. Birthright is still mostly European in its cultures, I have to admit, but the core idioms of feudalism don’t apply to all cultures. The first thing that draws me to Aebrynis, the world of Birthright, is that is does draw heavily on real-world cultures (and more than just England), which sets it apart from a lot of TSR’s settings. Setting those things aside, though, Birthright has a lot of worthwhile lessons left to teach. If it weren’t wedded pretty heavily to its AD&D 2e rules, it would be just about perfect some of the setting’s design elements were, if not common, not unknown in 2e design, but would be rejected outright in the design environment of 2013. I’ve mentioned Birthright a dozen or more times over the past few years of writing this blog, especially while playing around with SIFRP hacks, but I’ve never written a detailed post of why it deserves its place in the canon of D&D’s settings.