Castles & Crusades battle tactics

[Mythmere1]

I've been mulling over the tactical effects that the Castles & Crusades rules have on combat. If anyone else has insights, please let me know.

One thing is that although a character's ability to do weird and varied things to a face-to-face opponent is reduced considerably in C&C, the overall complexity of the group's combat tactics is about as flexible as in 3.x.

There are considerable differences in how the complexity works. The introduction of facing rules means that it is more important to get behind enemies (and prevent them from getting behind you) than it is to break their line and gain flanking attacks in a wide-open melee.

This means that a coherent line of battle is more important in C&C than it is in 3E, although both systems still make it optimal to keep weaker characters protected behind the line, especially the magic using classes.

I'm still parsing out the tactical implications, of the line-of-battle and flank versus the 3E strategy of break the enemy line and use flanking attacks.

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

One thing that immediately leaps to mind is that the C&C system (or any facing system) usually makes it more difficult for the PCs to gain tactical advantage.

The iconic "party of four" has two, maybe three meleers, and one of those will be a rogue who can't hold a line as well as the fighter and cleric. The mage, barring tenser's transformation, basically needs to stay behind the line.

In d20's facingless, flanking oriented system, it takes only two to tango and the penalties for breaking the line aren't as severe. A facing system means that you need to protect your flanks, something that is almost always easier for a larger force.

Now, if your group has a dozen PCs and they're fighting a pair of trolls, the facing system is beneficial to the PCs. I have that many players, but it doesn't seem to be the standard.

Actually, I've thought about introducing facing rules (ala Unearthed Arcana) to my d20 game, since it's set in the world of a game (Final Fantasy Tactics) where facing was extremely important.

 

[Mythmere1]

That's an insightful point, Mooglempmog - any facing system benefits the side with more combatants, which is usually the bad guys except in battles with big nasties.

I wish BOTH C&C and 3.x used slightly better modifiers for situations in which one side or the other fights well enough to gain better ground.

 

[Dragonhelm]

I don't have my C&C PHB with me at the moment...

Could you explain a bit how the C&C facing rules work?

Thanks in advance.

 

[Mythmere1]

I don't have my C&C PHB with me at the moment...

Could you explain a bit how the C&C facing rules work?

Thanks in advance.

+1 to attacks on rear sides, +2 to rear attack, rogues get multiple damage for back attacks.

In 3.5 (IIRC) it's a +1 bonus to hit any time two attackers are on opposite sides of a defender.

 

[Dragonhelm]

Thanks for the info, Mythmere1.

 

[Charles Dunwoody]

I think C&C brings back melee as an option for high level clerics.

In my 12th level D&D campaign the cleric can inflict about 24 hit points max if he hits twice.

The fighter routinely (not max damage) does around 50-70 points of damage.

With monsters having hit points in the hundreds, the cleric never melees. If he does, he looks and feels pathetic. Instead, he flamestrikes, casts prayer, operating almost like a wizard.

In C&C, with no Power Attack, and high Str being more rare, the fighter still shines with his two attacks and higher Str. But the cleric can still melee and do some good. This change works since the C&C cleric casts fewer spells per day than a D&D cleric (no domains, fewer stat boosting items to push up Wis and gain bonus spells).

I like the fact that in C&C attribute boosting items are more rare, Str bonuses are more spread out, and fighters don't dominate melee so completely that everyone else should just not get involved.

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

I think C&C brings back melee as an option for high level clerics.

In my 12th level D&D campaign the cleric can inflict about 24 hit points max if he hits twice.

The fighter routinely (not max damage) does around 50-70 points of damage.

With monsters having hit points in the hundreds, the cleric never melees. If he does, he looks and feels pathetic. Instead, he flamestrikes, casts prayer, operating almost like a wizard.

In C&C, with no Power Attack, and high Str being more rare, the fighter still shines with his two attacks and higher Str. But the cleric can still melee and do some good. This change works since the C&C cleric casts fewer spells per day than a D&D cleric (no domains, fewer stat boosting items to push up Wis and gain bonus spells).

I like the fact that in C&C attribute boosting items are more rare, Str bonuses are more spread out, and fighters don't dominate melee so completely that everyone else should just not get involved.

Wow... High-level clerics in 3.x are generally knocked for being melee munchkins (though not as much as druids). In fact, I've rarely seen fighters even compete past 15th level. Barbarians and paladins basically start to fall by the wayside as well.

In 3.5 (IIRC) it's a +1 bonus to hit any time two attackers are on opposite sides of a defender.

Actually, it's a +2 bonus any time two attackers are on opposite sides of the defender.

 

[Mythmere1]

Wow... High-level clerics in 3.x are generally knocked for being melee munchkins (though not as much as druids). In fact, I've rarely seen fighters even compete past 15th level. Barbarians and paladins basically start to fall by the wayside as well.

I agree (not necessarily munchkin, tho'). 3E clerics I've seen stand in the line, then back out to cure, taking the risk of the AOO. 3E is more mobile within the melee than C&C.

Actually, it's a +2 bonus any time two attackers are on opposite sides of the defender.

Oops. I had a feeling I might be wrong on that.

C&C definitely encourages hirelings by the combat style. Even high level parties can really leverage their tactical situation by employing some red-shirts. Assuming the hirelings can stand up to the punishment for a while - long enough for the party hardpoint to gain an advantage.

 

[Charles Dunwoody]

Wow... High-level clerics in 3.x are generally knocked for being melee munchkins (though not as much as druids). In fact, I've rarely seen fighters even compete past 15th level. Barbarians and paladins basically start to fall by the wayside as well.

Do these clerics take combat feats? Or pump up their strength? Because I just don't see how any class can melee better than a fighter.