Castles and crusades Questions:

[Sitara]

I am thinking about getting castles and crusades, but I have a few questions:

1)What is the magic item dependancy level in this game? Arew monsters deigned toonly be taken out with a magically equipped party? Or are high level gritty games possible?

2)I hear multiclassing is not possible. If so, how are we suuposed to make a warrior/mage pc, which is a popular sterotype?

3)How easy is it to tack on feats to the classes?

Regards.

 

[JDJblatherings]

I am thinking about getting castles and crusades, but I have a few questions:

1)What is the magic item dependancy level in this game? Arew monsters deigned toonly be taken out with a magically equipped party? Or are high level gritty games possible?

2)I hear multiclassing is not possible. If so, how are we suuposed to make a warrior/mage pc, which is a popular sterotype?

3)How easy is it to tack on feats to the classes?

Regards.

Item dependecny is lower then in 3.x, the whoel partty doesn't have to be buffed to survive an encounter.
Multiclassing is certainly possible, it just isnt in the rulebook.
One could tack on whatever feats one wanted to as it would be a new subsytem in yuor houerules.

 

[Greylock]

I'm currently playing a Rogue/Wizard. So, multiclassing is possible. There are a variety of variations that allow it. Our game is extremely low magic, and it works well, but then, all our games tend to be low magic.

 

[jdrakeh]

1)What is the magic item dependancy level in this game?

None. AFAIC, it wasn't a factor in design.

2)I hear multiclassing is not possible. If so, how are we suuposed to make a warrior/mage pc, which is a popular sterotype?

By design, multiclassing is not allowed (i.e., the game contains absolutely no rules for it). That said, it is pretty easy to apply the multiclassing rules from any existing edition of D&D/AD&D.

3)How easy is it to tack on feats to the classes?

Really easy. You can pretty much drop them into the system, RAW in 3x D&D.

 

[Treebore]

Its best if you go to trolllord.com and sign into the forums. We'll share our various house rules, etc... to help you make C&C the game you want it to be.

 

[Mystaros]

By design, multiclassing is not allowed (i.e., the game contains absolutely no rules for it). That said, it is pretty easy to apply the multiclassing rules from any existing edition of D&D/AD&D.

To be fair, it isn't that multiclassing is not allowed, it is that the form of multiclassing a judge must use in his game isn't strictly defined. The fact that there are no rules for it does not disallow it; that means it is up to the judge what rules to use. C&C is more of a "that which is not covered in the rules is up to the judge" rather than "that which is not covered in the rules is not allowed" kind of game.

Of course, for complete newbies to gaming, the lack of rules for multiclassing means they are probably going to have problems with how to do it, if they even think of it at all. But for experienced game masters from any of the editions, it gives them the opportunity to use that form of multiclassing that they prefer...

 

[FATDRAGONGAMES]

Treebore-wasn't multi-classing covered in an issue of the Crusader? I'm not at home right now so i can't check. Also, I think it will be covered in the upcoming Castle Keepers Guide.

Our game is definitely low on magic items and the PCs are doing just fine.

 

[jdrakeh]

To be fair, it isn't that multiclassing is not allowed. . .

I really, really, hate this fallacy. The reality of "You can add it yourself!" does not make options and rules that are not present in a game, as-written, in any way, shape, or form part of a game's core design. If there aren't rules for something in a game, the rules are absent. If rules are absent, they are not present. If rules are not present, then they aren't part of the game. Is saying "If a game doesn't include rules for X, then X is not part of the game." really that much of a stretch?

 

[jdrakeh]

Treebore-wasn't multi-classing covered in an issue of the Crusader? I'm not at home right now so i can't check. Also, I think it will be covered in the upcoming Castle Keepers Guide.

Our game is definitely low on magic items and the PCs are doing just fine.

I actually think that EGG had some house-rules for it in the CZ hardcover. That said, it was stressed by various TL affiliates on several occassions that these rules were not considered core C&C rules.

 

[Dragonhelm]

Treebore-wasn't multi-classing covered in an issue of the Crusader? I'm not at home right now so i can't check. Also, I think it will be covered in the upcoming Castle Keepers Guide.

Yeah, there was an issue that had a variety of variants. I forget the issue number.

Our game is definitely low on magic items and the PCs are doing just fine.

The idea that a game should require magic items kind of takes the fun out of it for me. In my mind, a magic item for a player should be kind of rare. It should have meaning, and be a surprise. You shouldn't approach a level and say that you should have a certain amount of magic items there. Of course, some random treasure is fun too.

For example, let's say I have a fighter who, by the rules, should have a +3 sword. That's all well and good, but what if the family's +1 sword that was passed down to him by his father has more meaning?

(And granted, a 1st-level character shouldn't have a +5 sword.)

I think players are a resourceful lot. Yes, part of the fun of D&D is in obtaining magic items. But it shouldn't be something special.