More Castles & Crusades details

[BASHMAN]

Hey, let's play 3rd Ed

Bob plays Third Edition D&D. Tom plays Castles and Crusades.

Bob spends half an hour creating a character and arguing with the GM over which character creation method will be used, what special variant classes he will allow, which feats from the various "splat" books are allowed, which rules from the dozens of suppliments he will allow, figuring out which feats give the greatest bonus for the prerequits, exactly what skills he needs compared to what he plans to take when he multiclasses next level, and once the other 4 players go through the same process, he is ready to play. The GM however, is starting the campaign the next session, as this session was only designated for Character creation.

Tom rolls the dice, assigns his scores, and decided to play a human fighter. He chooses his weapon and armor, picks a few more pieces of standard gear, and takes about 1 minute to complete his character. Five minutes later, he and the other players are slaying goblins, and enjoying the strategy of the game-- not character creation.

 

[MerricB]

*** I don't like the "Goofus" title on the 3E player's part, but as to the point of the post - with 3E being slower to prepare for in the case of many players, I have no argument. C&C will be great for many people. ***

 

[BASHMAN]

Oh C'mon

So, look who can dish it out, but cannot take any criticism?

I was just pointing out that D&D3E was not THE perfect game. I also wanted to provide an example of WHY someone would play C&C instead of D&D3E. I thought the Goofus/Galant highlights magazine thing was cute, not hostile.

I just think it is somewhat hypocritical that people can jump all over C&C, a system they have never seen, but by giving any critisism over 3rd Ed, I have commited some sort of heresy. I imagine I am going to be excommunicated from these boards pretty soon for my opinion...

 

[johnsemlak]

Goofus plays Third Edition D&D. Galant plays Castles and Crusades.

Goofus spends half an hour creating a character and arguing with the GM over which character creation method will be used, what special variant classes he will allow, which feats from the various "splat" books are allowed, which rules from the dozens of suppliments he will allow, figuring out which feats give the greatest bonus for the prerequits, exactly what skills he needs compared to what he plans to take when he multiclasses next level, and once the other 4 players go through the same process, he is ready to play. The GM however, is starting the campaign the next session, as this session was only designated for Character creation.

Galant rolls the dice, assigns his scores, and decided to play a human fighter. He chooses his weapon and armor, picks a few more pieces of standard gear, and takes about 1 minute to complete his character. Five minutes later, he and the other players are slaying goblins, and enjoying the strategy of the game-- not character creation.

That could make a good TV commercial.

 

[MerricB]

*** See my previous post. I now accept that epochrpg wasn't posting to demean 3E players; it was a cultural misunderstanding. No, Australians don't know who Goofus and Gallant are! ***

 

[nsruf]

Galant rolls the dice, assigns his scores, and decided to play a human fighter. He chooses his weapon and armor, picks a few more pieces of standard gear, and takes about 1 minute to complete his character. Five minutes later, he and the other players are slaying goblins, and enjoying the strategy of the game-- not character creation.

This sounds good, and I am really interested in seeing how C&C turns out, but I hope the Trolls can avoid two of the pitfalls (IMO, of course), of earlier editions:

1) Every fighter is the same as every other fighter.
2) There is little strategy except "I hit him - he hits me".

To avoid these, d20 has feats and combat maneuvers, which may be a tad complicated for some. I don't mind them, as they add a lot of variety to the game. But fast character creation and quicker (but interesting!) combat might just convince me to give C&C a try.

 

[MerricB]

I hope the Trolls can avoid two of the pitfalls (IMO, of course), of earlier editions:

1) Every fighter is the same as every other fighter.
2) There is little strategy except "I hit him - he hits me".

To avoid these, d20 has feats and combat maneuvers, which may be a tad complicated for some. I don't mind them, as they add a lot of variety to the game. But fast character creation and quicker (but interesting!) combat might just convince me to give C&C a try.

Yes, it will be interesting to see how TLG handles that.

As you add details, you slow down the game. The trick is to add just enough detail so that the game doesn't get too slow!

I've occasionally heard words like "modular" be used referring to C&C, but I'm unsure of their import - they don't always mean exactly what you might expect.

Cheers!

 

[Frostmarrow]

I imagine that they won't tackle this. Sure, it can become a bit boring just hacking and rolling one at a time on each other until one drops. But this is the point. From the lack of detail in the rules, space is created for the players to describe the action the way they want. "I hit him for 6 points of damage. -That's what a swift kick to the groin will do for ya!"

If you need something extra to defeat your foes you'd better get creative and convince the DM that your newest crazy scheme actually might work. "Yes, we'll try to sneak up on the ledge and drop boulders on the sleeping dragon."

But hey. This is just pure speculation on my part.

 

[MerricB]

But hey. This is just pure speculation on my part.

It's probably somewhat accurate speculation.

However, I'd like to point out that AD&D had rules for grappling, disarming, pummelling and the like. They weren't always very good rules, but they were there. By the time you got to 2E, they were implemented in a fairly simple, but effective, manner.

As I recall, in at least on edition of D&D, you could disarm an opponent if you made a successful "to hit" roll (perhaps at a penalty), and then if the opponent failed a saving throw. That's a pretty simple procedure. Adding that to C&C wouldn't be too hard, and it's unlikely to slow down the game so much.

OTOH, the Grappling rules would be harder. I've never seen a "simple" set of rules for grappling. (Or maybe I just can't remember any! )

Cheers!

 

[Frostmarrow]

I think that everything that you descibe above can be accomplished with the To Hit vs AC reduces HP mechanic.

The person that lowers an opponent's hp to zero get to state the terms: I chop his head off. I strangle him until he's blue. I disarm him with swiftness and catch his weapon. I'll smack him over the head with a blackjack so he becomes unconscious.

Zero hp means that you have to accept the terms. The alternative is death. Frankly, I don't see why the choice of weapon matters at all.