Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="tx7321" data-source="post: 3067658" data-attributes="member: 43146">Ghul today -I must, however, disagree with your assessment of C&amp;C being &quot;too 3eish&quot; as I find it exactly opposite thereof. The system is intuitive, with a core mechanic that applies to all situations, yet variable in that every character has a different set of primary and secondary attributes. Also, the difficulty of any situation (challenge class) is completely determined by the DM, arbitrarily, based on the DM's sense of logic and probablility in the given situation. Thus, the DM holds the power, and no two situations are necessarily alike.- First thanks for your posts, they are insightful.&nbsp; I think your miss-reading me by your tone.&nbsp; C&amp;C was the game that openned my eyes to simplistic fast combat (I had been a player in AD&amp;D1 but never&nbsp; DMed it, in 3E I started DMing and found it overwhelming).&nbsp; Despite its simplicity, C&amp;C still handles resolutions in a similar way to 3E (SIEGE) this is obvious to me anyway.&nbsp; Think about your example above: in 3E you add up modifiers (which takes time) and the DM still is the only one who knows what chance you have to succeed (just like in C&amp;C).&nbsp; AD&amp;D1, on the other hand, uses tables or the DM scratches his head and out of the blue says, &quot;roll your dex&quot; or &quot;roll your petrification.Its a system that encourages a role of the dice to determine outcome in any situation, even non-combat (remember bluff and fast talk...I hated those) its the same thing just less complex. Anyhow don't get me wrong, C&amp;C is great, and might end up being better then AD&amp;D1 and D&amp;D, but I won't know until I try.&nbsp; Ghul your a lucky man to have players that aren't winey babies.&nbsp; I still haven't gotten my players to download OSRIC.&nbsp; Seriously, I should take your advise. TLG is going to release a version 2 of C&amp;C.&nbsp; The question is, with OSRIC having little or no difficulty in its legal stance (and it stays that way), will C&amp;C switch?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="tx7321, post: 3067658, member: 43146"] Ghul today -I must, however, disagree with your assessment of C&C being "too 3eish" as I find it exactly opposite thereof. The system is intuitive, with a core mechanic that applies to all situations, yet variable in that every character has a different set of primary and secondary attributes. Also, the difficulty of any situation (challenge class) is completely determined by the DM, arbitrarily, based on the DM's sense of logic and probablility in the given situation. Thus, the DM holds the power, and no two situations are necessarily alike.- First thanks for your posts, they are insightful. I think your miss-reading me by your tone. C&C was the game that openned my eyes to simplistic fast combat (I had been a player in AD&D1 but never DMed it, in 3E I started DMing and found it overwhelming). Despite its simplicity, C&C still handles resolutions in a similar way to 3E (SIEGE) this is obvious to me anyway. Think about your example above: in 3E you add up modifiers (which takes time) and the DM still is the only one who knows what chance you have to succeed (just like in C&C). AD&D1, on the other hand, uses tables or the DM scratches his head and out of the blue says, "roll your dex" or "roll your petrification. Its a system that encourages a role of the dice to determine outcome in any situation, even non-combat (remember bluff and fast talk...I hated those) its the same thing just less complex. Anyhow don't get me wrong, C&C is great, and might end up being better then AD&D1 and D&D, but I won't know until I try. Ghul your a lucky man to have players that aren't winey babies. I still haven't gotten my players to download OSRIC. Seriously, I should take your advise. TLG is going to release a version 2 of C&C. The question is, with OSRIC having little or no difficulty in its legal stance (and it stays that way), will C&C switch? [/QUOTE]

Verification