Anyone care to read my 4 page C&C review?

[Mythmere1]

Lol.

The short answer is yes.

I am extraordinarily mellow [dramatic pause] most of the time.

That's what I get for posting directly after being on hold with customer service and while finishing up a book (if you want to know what book, check out my blog).

Anyhoo... hijack over and apologies to all I offended and all that.

Chuck

No problem - if customer service was involved you are utterly forgiven!

 

[bolie]

Um... how can you stat out a divinely infused vampire sorcerer 19 in C&C?

You can't.

How long would it take you to make up a 12th level human wizard with no templates? You could easily just max out the class skills by fiat and give a total of 6 feats (I could probably pick 6 off the top of my head).

I could stat out a 3.5e character equivalent to any C&C character in the same amount of time. I could probably do the 3.5e character without any books (though I might need to look up save progression for some classes and class skills, though I could also fudge those). The C&C character would require the book because I'm not as familiar with it.

How hard is it to add a couple of fighter levels to a troll or an ogre? It's really not that hard. If you want to make a half-dragon tauric ogre/gorgon with wings and levels in three different classes, that might take you a while. But if you want to do the same thing in C&C, you have to make it all up from scratch, which you can do in 3.5e as well. Last time I checked, the DM makes everything up and there are no referees running around busting people for giving the wrong number of skill points to that 8 HD giant or whatever.

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

Um... how can you stat out a divinely infused vampire sorcerer 19 in C&C?

You can't.

How long would it take you to make up a 12th level human wizard with no templates? You could easily just max out the class skills by fiat and give a total of 6 feats (I could probably pick 6 off the top of my head).

I could stat out a 3.5e character equivalent to any C&C character in the same amount of time. I could probably do the 3.5e character without any books (though I might need to look up save progression for some classes and class skills, though I could also fudge those). The C&C character would require the book because I'm not as familiar with it.

How hard is it to add a couple of fighter levels to a troll or an ogre? It's really not that hard. If you want to make a half-dragon tauric ogre/gorgon with wings and levels in three different classes, that might take you a while. But if you want to do the same thing in C&C, you have to make it all up from scratch, which you can do in 3.5e as well. Last time I checked, the DM makes everything up and there are no referees running around busting people for giving the wrong number of skill points to that 8 HD giant or whatever.

Excellent, excellent point.

Even if you don't want to 'wing it' completely the way I often do, a d20 NPC is only much more complex than a C&C one if you want it to be.

Nonetheless, time me: I'm going to do a celestial ogre sorcerer 4 immediately after posting this. Keep in mind that I'm not in practice as I normally don't go into this much detail on a stat block and don't use D&D's spell system for NPCs.

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

Celestial Ogre Sorcerer 4
HD: 4d8+4d4+16 (48 hp)
Ini: +0
Speed: 40 ft.
AC: 9, touch 9, flat-footed 9
BAB/Grapple: +5/+15
Attack: +2 large greatsword +11 melee (3d6+11/19-20)
Full Attack: +2 large greatsword +11 melee (3d6+11/19-20)
SA: Smite evil 1/day (+8 damage)
SQ: Darkvision 60 ft., DR 5/magic, resistance to cold and acid 5, SR 9
Saves: Fort +10, Ref +3, Will +8
Abilities: Str 23, Dex 10, Con 18, Int 7, Wis 10, Cha 13
Feats: Cleave, Iron Will, Power Attack
Skills: Listen +7, Spellcraft +3
CR: 6
LA: +4

Spells known: 6/3/1

0th: acid splash, daze, detect magic, mage hand, resistance, touch of fatigue
1st: mage armor, magic missile, shield
2nd: bull's strength

Spells/day: 6/7/3

Gear: 9400
+2 large greatsword (8,400)
+1 cloak of resistance (1,000)

 

[Morpheus]

Potential positives are subjective. Sure, less set up time is a plus, but it's not so much of a plus it if didn't fit what the reviewer was looking for. (Just as an example.) Some products that may be loved by some could very well be totally hated by others, and the review will reflect that.

Kane

For all of the arguing of the "positives" and "negatives" of C&C, I think one of the biggest so-called "positives" really isn't-less prep time. Who does that really benefit? Just the CK. What about the players? Doesn't do jack for them. If the players don't buy into the races/classes/system (things that they have some control over), all of the speed/ease-of-prep-time in the world isn't going to save the game. If players don't like what they're playing, they'll stop playing.
Also, one other thing-how come TLG doesn't get blasted as bad as Mongoose for their editting gaffs? Mongoose got flayed for Conan and, while it isn't quite as bad, C&C is pretty bad. Doesn't seem quite right...
I've read the book; read the arguments; read the reviews and I came to the conclusion that it's just meh. Another game system-nothing more, nothing less...
Now, back to your regularly scheduled "debate"...

 

[Akrasia]

... I think one of the biggest so-called "positives" really isn't-less prep time. Who does that really benefit? Just the CK. What about the players? Doesn't do jack for them...

Given that the GM for any RPG does 95 percent of the work, I think a game that helps him/her out should promote this feature as one of its main virtues.

Sure, if the players simply do not like a game, they will not play it. Big surprise. But it is refreshing to see a system that recognizes the burden on the GM, and tries to lessen it somewhat.

IME the GM's happiness with a system it perhaps the most important factor in determining whether or not a gaming session succeeds.

 

[Akrasia]

...
Even if you don't want to 'wing it' completely the way I often do, a d20 NPC is only much more complex than a C&C one if you want it to be....

But I thought that all the additional 'information' and 'rules detail' -- i.e. ensuring that the various abilities of different NPCs and creatures had appropriate 'rules mechanisms' to realize them inplay -- was one of the main virtues of 3e over a game like C&C?

If you're just going to 'wing it' with NPCs, monsters, etc., you may as well be playing a game like C&C, rather than 3e (since the C&C rules provide the tools to help the GM do this).

...
Nonetheless, time me: I'm going to do a celestial ogre sorcerer 4 immediately after posting this. Keep in mind that I'm not in practice as I normally don't go into this much detail on a stat block and don't use D&D's spell system for NPCs.

I'm not sure what you're trying to prove here by doing this. Is anyone really interested? All you are doing is demonstrating (in a rather long-winded manner) that *you* don't mind statting up 3e creatures, and find it relatively easy. Big deal.

Lots of 3e DMs think that statting up NPCs and monsters is a major pain -- even many of 3e's biggest fans/supporters. I don't understand how posting creatures is going to change the way in which they experience the system.

 

[Grazzt]

I don't understand how posting creatures is going to change the way in which they experience the system.

It wont. Peeps that like and play C&C will continue to do so. Those that like D&D/d20 will continue to do so. Those that like both...the same. Those that dislike both...probably aren't even reading this thread.

Like I said above...C&C is what it is. D&D/d20 is what it is. Two different systems with many things similar and many things different. Both have their good points and both also have their bad points. There will never be a game system that everyone likes. One person's "perfect" system may be viewed as potentially useless/not worthwhile by another. No big deal. Each to their own.

 

[Grazzt]

I could probably do the 3.5e character without any books (though I might need to look up save progression for some classes

Just remember this formula and you wont have to look up save progressions ever again:

Good saves: (Level/2) + 2
Poor saves: Level / 3

Works for all classes and monsters. Oh..and round down (as always).

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

But I thought that all the additional 'information' and 'rules detail' -- i.e. ensuring that the various abilities of different NPCs and creatures had appropriate 'rules mechanisms' to realize them inplay -- was one of the main virtues of 3e over a game like C&C?

No, allowing the players to customize their characters' abilities to as exact a level as possible while maintaining levels and mechanics they're comfortable with is the value of that information and rules detail.

It also serves to inspire a lot of my on-the-fly mechanics - the shadow jump power in my actual-in-play example, for instance, comes from the Forgotten Realms book 'Unapproachable East.' I've nabbed cool powers from innumerable sources, and even used creatures out-of-the-box, although I've heavily summarized their abilities for use in play.

If you're just going to 'wing it' with NPCs, monsters, etc., you may as well be playing a game like C&C, rather than 3e (since the C&C rules provide the tools to help the GM do this).

3e (and more importantly, games I actually like, such as OGL Conan and d20 Modern) provide a wealth of inspiration and building blocks from which to produce NPCs and monsters. I don't need "tools" to do this, and I certainly don't need inflexible minimalist stat blocks.

My players, meanwhile, gain much.

I lose absolutely nothing.

Everybody wins.

I'm not sure what you're trying to prove here by doing this. Is anyone really interested? All you are doing is demonstrating (in a rather long-winded manner) that *you* don't mind statting up 3e creatures, and find it relatively easy. Big deal.

I was interested; I've done this for fun at times, but never for a game, I was curious how long it would take me, and I had a minute to spare.

In the end, it took too long for what I gained.

If it were a PC, I'd be happy to take that much time and more agonizing over every detail, figuring out how much I could squeeze into my character concept and what events might have led the character down that path. Every feat a story, every level a legend (this is why I hate starting at 1st level).

Lots of 3e DMs think that statting up NPCs and monsters is a major pain -- even many of 3e's biggest fans/supporters. I don't understand how posting creatures is going to change the way in which they experience the system.

It doesn't. It was just an exercise, one which reminded me why I don't bother. It didn't really add anything to the finished creature, IMO.

However, not having those building blocks (and the convenience of being able to combine them at will however I like and with however much information I want to bother transcribing) greatly adds to the finished creature.

Not having those building blocks would make the creature useless as a PC, and that would greatly sadden me.

Not having those building blocks leaves me with no choice but to do without them. Having them gives me the choice of using them or not.