Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Interesting Ryan Dancey comment on "lite" RPGs
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="JohnSnow" data-source="post: 2390564" data-attributes="member: 32164"><p>I confess I do not have my book with me at work. I read it last night and the edition bashing was pretty clear. I'll quote the paragraph if I can find it, but I'll come back to this later.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>In THAC0, a character had to roll a certain number to hit AC0. As the character progressed, his "target number" (THAC0) decreased (A THAC0 of 19 rather than a +1 to hit). The C&C SIEGE system takes a base target number (18) and then adjusts it <em>downward</em> to 12 if the skill is a prime. In other words, Primes in Siege give a TN of 12 vs. 18, rather than a +6 to checks) Consequently, having a Prime implies that the task is somehow easier for the character with a Prime, as opposed to the character is more skilled. This gets to the subjective, relative nature of C&C's resolution system. However, the mere fact that Primes lower the target number, <em>rather than raising the skill roll</em> is THAC0-ish. After all the times I've explained this, if you still don't understand, I can't help you. I grant the Prime thing is a onetime issue rather than recurring and that more difficult tasks mean higher difficulty numbers, not lower ones, which is not THAC0ish. But why a lower target number rather than a bonus to the skill? Just seems weird. FWIW, the THAC0 crack was intended as a friendly jab between us, in an effort to keep this thread light...<img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink ;)" data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /></p><p></p><p> </p><p></p><p>Those are things it DOES by virtue of what it <em>takes away</em> from the Core rules of the game (as presented in the OGL that C&C is published under). I specifically asked what it "added" to the game. You gave the answers I've come to expect from C&C players - it enhances the game experience by virtue of what it removes. That's a subjective value judgement, not an objective addition of new rules.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>It means that the decision to "handwave" difficulty numbers based on the subjective criteria of easy, average, tough, challenging, heroic, is part of the Core Rules.</p><p></p><p>The decision to base all relevant skills on one's attributes and level, perhaps with some allowance for "class skills," is another simplification of the core rules (and one that was presented in the OGL <em>Unearthed Arcana</em>.</p><p></p><p>Taking out feats is a simplification of the Core Rules. So is removing attacks of opportunity from combat.</p><p></p><p>C&C, for all its assertions, is 3e stripped of its skill and feat systems, and one of its more complex combat rules (attacks of opportunity). That's it. The designers then looked at C&C's classes and realized that <em>without</em> those 3e elements, they were out of whack. So they borrowed the XP progression tables from AD&D and claimed that those somehow brought the classes back into balance. Or more accurately, that even though they were out of balance, the differerent XP progressions somehow "compensated" for that. Finally, the Trolls added in an ultra-simplistic skill system that they gave a clever name too (SIEGE), because a system that says "your PC has no skills" isn't one players will play for long.</p><p></p><p>I don't need C&C to play rules light D&D. I can do that without buying it. But I can't make money telling people to play their D&D game and throw out large portions of the rules. And neither could Troll Lord Games. So instead, they published a rulebook. One which, I'd bet, sold primarily to people who already owned the Core Rules.</p><p></p><p>I freely admit and give credit to the Trolls for inventive marketing. Wizards of the Coast couldn't make money selling rules-light D&D, which is why they give the rules away for FREE (the SRD).</p><p></p><p>I'm amazed (and impressed) that Troll Lord Games can.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="JohnSnow, post: 2390564, member: 32164"] I confess I do not have my book with me at work. I read it last night and the edition bashing was pretty clear. I'll quote the paragraph if I can find it, but I'll come back to this later. In THAC0, a character had to roll a certain number to hit AC0. As the character progressed, his "target number" (THAC0) decreased (A THAC0 of 19 rather than a +1 to hit). The C&C SIEGE system takes a base target number (18) and then adjusts it [i]downward[/i] to 12 if the skill is a prime. In other words, Primes in Siege give a TN of 12 vs. 18, rather than a +6 to checks) Consequently, having a Prime implies that the task is somehow easier for the character with a Prime, as opposed to the character is more skilled. This gets to the subjective, relative nature of C&C's resolution system. However, the mere fact that Primes lower the target number, [i]rather than raising the skill roll[/i] is THAC0-ish. After all the times I've explained this, if you still don't understand, I can't help you. I grant the Prime thing is a onetime issue rather than recurring and that more difficult tasks mean higher difficulty numbers, not lower ones, which is not THAC0ish. But why a lower target number rather than a bonus to the skill? Just seems weird. FWIW, the THAC0 crack was intended as a friendly jab between us, in an effort to keep this thread light...;) Those are things it DOES by virtue of what it [i]takes away[/i] from the Core rules of the game (as presented in the OGL that C&C is published under). I specifically asked what it "added" to the game. You gave the answers I've come to expect from C&C players - it enhances the game experience by virtue of what it removes. That's a subjective value judgement, not an objective addition of new rules. It means that the decision to "handwave" difficulty numbers based on the subjective criteria of easy, average, tough, challenging, heroic, is part of the Core Rules. The decision to base all relevant skills on one's attributes and level, perhaps with some allowance for "class skills," is another simplification of the core rules (and one that was presented in the OGL [i]Unearthed Arcana[/i]. Taking out feats is a simplification of the Core Rules. So is removing attacks of opportunity from combat. C&C, for all its assertions, is 3e stripped of its skill and feat systems, and one of its more complex combat rules (attacks of opportunity). That's it. The designers then looked at C&C's classes and realized that [i]without[/i] those 3e elements, they were out of whack. So they borrowed the XP progression tables from AD&D and claimed that those somehow brought the classes back into balance. Or more accurately, that even though they were out of balance, the differerent XP progressions somehow "compensated" for that. Finally, the Trolls added in an ultra-simplistic skill system that they gave a clever name too (SIEGE), because a system that says "your PC has no skills" isn't one players will play for long. I don't need C&C to play rules light D&D. I can do that without buying it. But I can't make money telling people to play their D&D game and throw out large portions of the rules. And neither could Troll Lord Games. So instead, they published a rulebook. One which, I'd bet, sold primarily to people who already owned the Core Rules. I freely admit and give credit to the Trolls for inventive marketing. Wizards of the Coast couldn't make money selling rules-light D&D, which is why they give the rules away for FREE (the SRD). I'm amazed (and impressed) that Troll Lord Games can. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Interesting Ryan Dancey comment on "lite" RPGs
Top