Castles & Crusades standing the test

[Henry]

...fortunately my CK (stupid word, btw) worked with me to build the character I wanted, and worked a lot of flexible house rules into his game to make it work.

Do what I do, and call it "GM" - it's close enough to "DM" and it works with all the systems. Heck, half the people on C&C forums call it DM'ing, anyway.

No, the trick is to create a system that allows the players to customize and build the character *they* want without sacrificing the game master's ability to run a quick, simple game.

Amen, brother Kluge! Testify!

I still would love to see a system whose complexity breaks down on a macro/micro level, where the DM can be using the Macro, and the Players can micromanage if they choose. As it is, in 3E and similar systems, I'm basically eyeballing all the mooks, and statting the big bad guys, but it raises complaints from people who want to see the DM play by the exact same rules as the players (which is NOT a complaint in C&C; the philosophy is, "the GM is final arbiter of the game, deal with it", only in prettier language).

RANT: Mutants and Masterminds is the closest thing I've seen to this concept, though it doesn't follow it all the way (it wasn't meant to). For instance, the book says you can buy Base attack bonus in two ways: either 3 power points for each +1 BAB, or you can buy them separately, as Melee, ranged, or unarmed, for a 1 point per point basis. Defense is bought as 2 power points per defense point, or 1 point per point in either physical or mental defense. In no case can a character have a bonus greater than their power level +5 in a given thing. If this kind of philosophy were extended, you could turn it into "kits" where a 60 point enemy had a +4 BAB, a 14 defense, a melee attack at 1d8+6, etc. in very generic terms and give it enough abilites where it was balanced versus most other opponents of that level. As it is, micromanaging in other systems produces an optimized character that is hands down better than a generic package; if there were caps to ensure that nothing got better than a given value, then the generic builds would be on par with the custom builds, and DMs would get the white-label NPC mechanics they want, and Players could have the kit-bashed custom jobs they wanted, without stepping on one anothers' toes.

C&C works very well for the beleaguered GM who doesn't want to spend 30 minutes on an NPC writeup, but for the player who wants to spend 30 minutes on stat-building and tweaking, it's not going to be as satisfactory in this regard. Maybe the happy medium is out there and has yet to be built, but I haven't seen it yet...

 

[der_kluge]

C&C works very well for the beleaguered GM who doesn't want to spend 30 minutes on an NPC writeup, but for the player who wants to spend 30 minutes on stat-building and tweaking, it's not going to be as satisfactory in this regard. Maybe the happy medium is out there and has yet to be built, but I haven't seen it yet...

I saw some mention of True20. Have you seen that ruleset?

I think with some work, HARP could get there, but the skill mechanic can be kind of complicated, and combat is a drag with all those tables. If you dumped the skill mechanic as written, and implemented a more d20 style combat system, I think HARP would be a good start.

 

[KenSeg]

I agree that I want to take more than 10 minutes to develop my character, but I don't want to be wasting my time in figuring out which special attack and combo works best and will make me godlike. I spend my time in character development in background story of the character. Who is he? What is his social level? Family? Any past misdeeds? What about why he became a fighter or whatever to begin with. This is the true meat of the character to me. Most of the time I develop that first and then just fill in the rest around it. My character may not be the most powerful wizard on the block, but I know why he hates Lord Gromby and perfers to wear the color yellow. Roleplaying versus rollplaying I guess.


-KenSeg
Playing since 1978

 

[Mythmere1]

I hear you on the micro/macro level, Henry. Well said. C&C's monsters (no stats, attack bonus is HD, save bonus is HD, etc) are very much like that, but as you say, the micro level in C&C isn't anywhere near as micro as you can get with 3.5.

 

[Dragonhelm]

I agree that I want to take more than 10 minutes to develop my character, but I don't want to be wasting my time in figuring out which special attack and combo works best and will make me godlike. I spend my time in character development in background story of the character. Who is he? What is his social level? Family? Any past misdeeds? What about why he became a fighter or whatever to begin with. This is the true meat of the character to me. Most of the time I develop that first and then just fill in the rest around it. My character may not be the most powerful wizard on the block, but I know why he hates Lord Gromby and perfers to wear the color yellow. Roleplaying versus rollplaying I guess.

I'm the same way.

One of the best characters I've ever played is a 2e Crown Knight from Dragonlance. All of his stats were average. The only one that gave him any sort of bonus was his 15 Con. Even though he had little to nothing in terms of "crunch", he had a wonderful background and playing him was a real joy.

Even when I do use elements like PrCs, it typically is to help flesh out a story concept. For example, I once played a Kagonesti (wild elf) beastmaster in the same game that I played the Crown Knight in. Years later, I wanted to play a sylvan mage (wizard or sorcerer with druid-like abilities) in another Dragonlance game I played in. Even though I was using the PrC for the basic concept, I worked up a history for the character that tied in real well with the old game.

Long story short, my beastmaster hated wizards (with good reason!), and so the sylvan mage was his son that grew up to be a wizard, though a nature-based one. The story elements tied nicely together, and there was a nice bit of conflict between father and son.

 

[Breakdaddy]

IME, "building" a character is the most fun. In fact, in a recent poll, most people on ENWorld preferred the process of building a character, and enjoyed spending a great deal of time on that process.

Well that seals it! EVERYONE must feel that way since many people on a board dedicated to D&D 3.x, a fairly complex game where you "build" your character, feel that way!!!!! Wonders never cease!!!!!!

 

[Von Ether]

Well that seals it! EVERYONE must feel that way since many people on a board dedicated to D&D 3.x, a fairly complex game where you "build" your character, feel that way!!!!! Wonders never cease!!!!!!

I was looking over Fantasy Flight Games Midnight setting. This looks like something meaty to get C&C around. Any suggestons on the things to keep in mind if I convert to Midnight.

 

[The Shaman]

Well that seals it! EVERYONE must feel that way since many people on a board dedicated to D&D 3.x, a fairly complex game where you "build" your character, feel that way!!!!! Wonders never cease!!!!!!

Oh, the intense pressure to conform...crushing me...must...break...free...



I'm happy to be part of the exception in this case: I really enjoy spending time on character creation - I don't enjoy spending my time crunching numbers. I'm looking forward to picking up the C&C books this summer and putting my 3e D&D books out to pasture.

 

[Treebore]

I don't mind spending time building a PC, its the time building all of the NPC's that takes the fun out of the game for me, plus keeping track of what they can do while running the encounters. I am by no means such a massive multi-tasker.

Plus I have to keep track of what each NPC can do because my players are always questioning how could the NPC do this or that? No faking it for me.

C&C is definitely a much less demanding and exhausting system for a DM to run. Not to mention makes it much easier to convert and use all my old D&D/AD&D stuff.

 

[Turanil]

I don't mind spending time building a PC, its the time building all of the NPC's that takes the fun out of the game for me, plus keeping track of what they can do while running the encounters.

C&C is definitely a much less demanding and exhausting system for a DM to run.

I second this opinion. IMO: this is one of the main interesting points of C&C.

I also like the fact that for me C&C allows me to run high level adventures (10+ level) easily, while I have real difficulty doing it in D&D 3e.