You see it - an ambush. Four with crossbows, watching from the shadows in upper story windows. One leaning against the wall forty feet ahead with his finger twitching nervously over his knife. Three at a table, barely visible through swinging saloon doors, but each with a hatchet in hand listening for the sound of fighting. You feel every grazing shift of the wind, hear the distant crake of carrion crows unaware of the feast that is about to be laid out.
You see beyond the walls of the buildings, even. No, beyond… something else. Another kind of wall. One distant, but ever-present. Five titanic figures, shrouded in the haze of vast distances, looking over you. They speak, but you cannot know their tongue. One commands the others, a theatrical gesture wrought across the entire sky, and the other four hurl stones of mountainous proportion. What calamity have you witnessed?
And in an instant, they vanish from your sight. One of the crossbowmen shot your leg.
It’s good! It depends on what you liked about 2 though, since they did shift a lot of the points of focus for 3. I personally like that they leaned into the roleplaying aspect of it. Managing a large realm is now a much more active task than it was in 2. It’s a shame that stuff like nomads and merchant republics aren’t playable yet, but I do think that the feudal gameplay is substantially better.
I have a homebrew that I need to revisit and fix the formatting of for mixed heritage PCs, and the system I came up with meant that I had to give every race four traits. Some of these would be minor, like darkvision, but there had to be four. I went with a once-per-day refuse-to-die ability and a proficiency-per-day advantage on a roll of your choice, so that the one thing humans do best is push through the tough situations
Alright my plans for the evening got cancelled so I decided to have a go at working this out. Methodology, a term I am using somewhat loosely, was to go down wikipedia’s list of largest empires, ignore each one that was already completely covered (the four big caliphates and several Chinese dynasties in particular), then take their peak territory from Geacron. Geacron isn’t an ideal source here, not least because the only way to “export” from it without paying money is print screen, but it’s good enough for these purposes. I also didn’t bother filling in the entire map because a couple of places were basically just going to come down to whichever country had them today due to how difficult to conquer they have historically been. Priority in overlaps is given to the larger empire. The result is this: https://i.imgur.com/kLNjpSm.png
On here we have:
This list leaves Western Sahara, Liberia, Sweden, Slovakia, Nepal, Bhutan, Papua New Guinea, and Antarctica for a total of 25 countries (or maybe 27 if you add Norway and Chile for maximum Antarctic coverage. I suppose you could also argue that the Treaty of Torsedillas granted half of Antarctica each to Spain and Portugal, not that either ever actually controlled it). Possibly also some islands, especially in the Pacific, but the map isn’t in a high enough resolution to tell. The most contested areas are the Levant and Central Asia. Some big empires that aren’t on the list include every Persian empire, the Ottomans, and Alexander’s empire.
I kinda want to see what the fewest countries you could cover the whole world with is if you took everything at its historical peak territory. So like post-WW1 British empire, Mongol empire just before Chinggis died, Umayyad caliphate when it stretched from Iran to Spain, Roman Empire under Trajan etc etc. How many do we need to fill in the whole map? And what’s the smallest country that we need in order to do so?
That fact that this is coming from a lemmynsfw.com account is beautiful