Castles and Crusades (NDA is lifted - ask questions, get answers)

[MerricB]

Yes.

Indeed, I would say that two C&C games run by different CKs are likely to be more different than two 3e games run by different DMs. They would likely be more different than two oAD&D games run by different DMs. They would likely be more similar than two oD&D games run by different referees. (Gross generalization, of course.)

A fantastic answer, however!

Apologies to anyone who thinks I was being too sensitive with the "No 3E sucks!" line - I've just had some very bad experiences with various 1E/2E fans, and I'd rather know the facts about the C&C game rather than the hype.

I personally think that C&C is a fantastic idea, and I wish it the best - I'll definitely try to pick up the main books when they come out.

Cheers!

 

[nsruf]

Some more questions for the playtesters:

1. How is the alignment system implemented?

Are there consequences for violating or changing your alignment if you are not a paladin or cleric? I am not a big fan of alignment in general, but the 3E implementation where classes without specific restrictions can basically forget about alignment alltogether always struck me as pointless.

And what about spells like detect evil and such? Does C&C use the old version where you can detect "malicious intent" but not actual alignment? I'd much prefer that to the 3E sure-fire "detect the bad guy" system.

2. Are there simple rules for called shots and unarmed combat?

I prefer not having to adjudicate maneuvers like tripping and disarming on the fly. And I recall the 2E unarmed combat rules with horror ("I grapple and pin him" - "You can only do that if your modified attack roll is 4 or 18, sorry!" Duh.)

 

[Turanil]

I am much satisfied with 3E and other d20 products, and I don't think to ever run a C&C game (except maybe for children: my daughter would seemingly understand the game more easily than a full D&D 3e). Now, I have at least two of my players who will probably be much interested in this game, and I would accept playing in it if they would run it.

Anyway, I bought the boxed set for the unique reason it reminds me so much of the original D&D boxed set (that I once owned). In fact, what I would love, would be that the C&C Player's Handbook would be called "Advanced Castle & Crusades", and would feature a cover art and interior layout reminiscing of the 1e AD&D books, the first printings... Well, I can still dream.

 

[Jackal42]

Ok, it's morning again and back to the questions!

I'm sorry I'm not quoting everyone when answering questions but I can't stand doing that...I'm a gamer not a computer wiz.

So, anyway, we're really not sure how much of the game is going to be OGL. Only the Trolls know that information at this point. Us playtesters could probably give a good guess but I'm not sure we're supposed to and, anyway, it would still be only a guess.

As for doing a sci-fi version of C&C, this is my opinion which I should really stay away from (but this question is harmless enough I think..lol), you wouldn't have any problems. The basic mechanic which is the backbone of C&C (12/18) takes anything a gamer can throw at it and keeps on coming. It's the most stable, workable, and felxible (not to mention the simplest) system I've ever seen. FYI, those comments are my opinions and not meant to trample on anyone's game! But, yes, I think C&C could be used for your own sci-fi conversion without any troubles at all.

Show me a system that will help me keep up with player and monster actions without my having to just remember them all and I'll be a very impressed gamer! Even systems that don't make you declare up front have that problem, though to a lesser degree. So C&C can be used either way you want.

We don't really have any information on alignments beyond which will be in the game. So how they are described, how they are penalized, and how spells/magic items work with them...we just don't know. I would venture to guess, however, that all of these things will be done just like the rest of C&C. You'll have a guideline or two and the rest will be up to your CK.

Unarmed combat is very simple. Takes up about a single column on one page to write the entire thing out. And, nope, no charts or anything like that. This is part of C&C that is probably closer to 3e than 2e actually.

And as for combat options you do have a rule for some of them like charging and disarming but called shots have not been included at this point (no idea if they will be or not). In my playtest games I fell back on the 12/18 mechanic (once again..lol) for called shots. If my player wanted to hit a specific spot on a creature he made a dexterity check (if dex is prime, 12 + target's level + -2 penalty for aiming). If he passed the check he was allowed to try and hit that specific area. If he failed he just had to swing. This didn't tie hitting and hitting a specific area into one roll. So it was possible to aim for a specific spot and miss it while still actually hitting the creature. My players loved it.

 

[nsruf]

Show me a system that will help me keep up with player and monster actions without my having to just remember them all and I'll be a very impressed gamer!

Um, d20? You declare what you do when it's your turn to act. The actions of everybody who acted before you have already been resolved. The actions of everybody who comes after you, you don't have to worry about just yet.

There is the minor issue of ready/delay, but that's not as bad as having to keep up with everybody's intended actions each turn.

So C&C can be used either way you want.

Now that I like.

We don't really have any information on alignments beyond which will be in the game. So how they are described, how they are penalized, and how spells/magic items work with them...we just don't know. I would venture to guess, however, that all of these things will be done just like the rest of C&C. You'll have a guideline or two and the rest will be up to your CK.

Well, I was interested in the tone set by the guidelines. Guess I'll have to wait for the book then.

Unarmed combat is very simple. Takes up about a single column on one page to write the entire thing out. And, nope, no charts or anything like that. This is part of C&C that is probably closer to 3e than 2e actually.

Glad to hear it.

And as for combat options you do have a rule for some of them like charging and disarming but called shots have not been included at this point (no idea if they will be or not).

Maybe "called shot" was the wrong term. I'm not very interested in introducing a hit location system to D&D, so what I meant were special maneuvers (trip, disarm, etc.). If there are some combat options like that spelled out, I'll be happy.

Thanks again for taking the time to answer these. I'm really looking forward to getting the game now. I just hope it won't be out much later than October.

 

[ecliptic]

I have a feeling I'll be adding a couple things from CC to my D&D game. I like the idea of the saving throws, aswell as the stats. As I was myself trying to figure out an alternative stat and saving throw system. I way to throw out Will, Fortitude and Reflex.

I still am trying to figure out a different yet same skill system. One where they don't become nearly as good so quickly. Where if they focus on one or two skills they can master it, but doing it still wouldn't hurt them entirely too much on their other skills. Basically similar to proficiencies from 2nd ed.

I will highly consider throwing out AoO and 5 foot step, hell I may do that soon. As it does bog down combat, even if you use a grid.

 

[Jackal42]

That's not quite what I meant about remembering player and monster actions. In d20 you still have players shouting out that they want to do this or that and you still have to remember what you want each monster to do (in short, that comment was supposed to be a joke). I wasn't talking about having to remember each action from the start of a round. As I said, C&C can play either old school or 3e in that regard.

And, yes, some combat options are covered. Just the basic ones but they cover anything normal your players would do. Anything off the wall, I'd rather answer on the fly anyway. But that's just me.

 

[Turanil]

Can you explain better the 12/18 system?

For example: My character is a thief, how he climbs that wall or that cliff or that tree? Or he is not of a class with climbing ability, yet was used to climb trees as a child (background), how does he climbs? Or he has no ability or background whatsoever, how does he climbs?

Thanks

 

[Jackal42]

The 12/18 mechanic is used for saves and most any other action besides combat.

It gives you a base target number depending on whether the attribute in question is prime or not (12 for prime and 18 for not).

At this point attribute checks just require a 1d20 roll + character level + attribute modifer (+1 for 15, etc). The target number for an attribute check isn't really based on 12/18 at this point (though most of us do it that way and it may actually be done that way in the finished book). But, right now, the CK would just set a number that he feels is right and you make the check as above (but I see no reason not to use 12/18 here as well even if the CK is left free to just ad-hoc the number).

So, to help a bit more I'll answer your specific questions here:

Rogue climbing a tree: Generally to climb a tree, steep hill or other "easy to climb" area the rogue needs no check at all. But if you want to climb the side of a building you make a dexterity check. Assuming your rogue's dexterity is prime then the CK would tell you that you need to roll 12 or higher on a d20. Your rogue then rolls 1d20 + his level + his dexterity modifier. If it's 12 or higher he climbs the wall (or at least part of it depending how tall it is).

How do other characters climb trees: This is up to your CK but what most of us do is simply let a character climb the tree, no check needed. It's pretty simple thing to do after all. Now if he's trying to climb a tree while being chased or some other difficult task then you might simply require a dexterity check (same as above). This character can not, however, climb walls or the sides of buildings like the rogue can. At least not by default. If you want to allow them to make the attempt there are any number of ways you can do it without stepping on the rogue's toes (dex check with a stiff penalty for a very short distance, things like that).

And that covers characters with backgrounds in tree climbing or not. Just assign a modifier to the 12/18 system and make them roll. Of course any class that actually has such an ability should have a much easier time and/or should be able to do things with that ability that other classes simply have no chance of doing at all.

 

[Turanil]

Thanks for the response. In fact the response seems clear, and the system looks dubious to me. With 1d20 + level + ability modifier, a DC of 12 or 18 is going to be easy to succeed. As such, the obvious houserule here is to have: prime ability = +6 (I would rather opt for +4) bonus to the check; appropriate class = + level, while other class = + half-level; (lets add a +3 or +2 bonus if the character has an apprpriate background); then the CK sets a DC as in d20 and lets roll the d20.

Okay, I will see when I get my boxed set. For what I understand, this is a game for CK to throw in their houserules...

Another thing: I note 15 = +1 bonus; 16 = +2; 17 = +3; 18 = +4. Well, at least in the 3e where it is 12-13, 14-15, 16-17, and 18-19, players were less incited to cheat to come up with uber stats. I remember those time when nobody wanted to play a fighter with less than 17 strength...