Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="rogueattorney" data-source="post: 1451851" data-attributes="member: 17551">Identical to the Moldvay/Cook version of D&amp;D.&nbsp; It was based on the assumption that people were rolling unmodified 3d6 for each ability score.&nbsp; I wonder if C&amp;C is the same.&nbsp; 1e used different ability score rolling methods, and hence upped the requirements for bonuses, usually kicking in around 15 instead of 13.&nbsp; One of the things I've always found odd about 3e is that they use the 4d6 method, and yet used the &quot;bell-curve&quot; bonus distribution giving bonuses for average ability scores.Cool.&nbsp; I personally never understood some people's problems with it.Wonder to what extent Knights = Cavaliers and Rogues = Bards?&nbsp; Also wonder whether there will be rules in place to emulate Rangers, Druids, Assassins and Illusionists?All praises!&nbsp; Abilities hardwired to classes!&nbsp; Archetypes live!.&nbsp; Now, I've got nothing against skill-based systems.&nbsp; It's just that if I want to play a skill based system, they're all over the place.&nbsp; I'll grab a game that's a skill based system and have fun.&nbsp; Dungeons &amp; Dragons (prior to 1985 or so) was not a skilled based system.&nbsp; To me, that's the defining characteristic of D&amp;D.&nbsp; Heck, all the skill based systems out there were designed that way to be different from D&amp;D in the first place.&nbsp; So the evolution toward a more skill based system never made any sense to me.&nbsp; As it is, in-print class based systems are few and far between.Awesome!&nbsp; I'm jealous.&nbsp; This is how to game!!!&nbsp; Two-hour character creation sessions be damned!!!&nbsp; Roll em' up and roll em' out.&nbsp; If they die, who cares, it only takes minutes to roll a new one.R.A.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="rogueattorney, post: 1451851, member: 17551"] Identical to the Moldvay/Cook version of D&D. It was based on the assumption that people were rolling unmodified 3d6 for each ability score. I wonder if C&C is the same. 1e used different ability score rolling methods, and hence upped the requirements for bonuses, usually kicking in around 15 instead of 13. One of the things I've always found odd about 3e is that they use the 4d6 method, and yet used the "bell-curve" bonus distribution giving bonuses for average ability scores. Cool. I personally never understood some people's problems with it. Wonder to what extent Knights = Cavaliers and Rogues = Bards? Also wonder whether there will be rules in place to emulate Rangers, Druids, Assassins and Illusionists? All praises! Abilities hardwired to classes! Archetypes live!. Now, I've got nothing against skill-based systems. It's just that if I want to play a skill based system, they're all over the place. I'll grab a game that's a skill based system and have fun. Dungeons & Dragons (prior to 1985 or so) was not a skilled based system. To me, that's the defining characteristic of D&D. Heck, all the skill based systems out there were designed that way to be different from D&D in the first place. So the evolution toward a more skill based system never made any sense to me. As it is, in-print class based systems are few and far between. Awesome! I'm jealous. This is how to game!!! Two-hour character creation sessions be damned!!! Roll em' up and roll em' out. If they die, who cares, it only takes minutes to roll a new one. R.A. [/QUOTE]

Verification