More Castles & Crusades details

[Frostmarrow]

Disarming, grappling, non-lethal attacks, are all just shortcuts to victory. But you can't have shortcuts to victory in a game where power is the measure of HP you've got. Instead you need to finish off the hps first and then describe how and what the result will be.

"I catch his arm and bend it up behind his back. I could kill him if I wanted to - but first I need some information."

 

[Maggan]

Goofus and Gallant?

*** 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! ***

Neither do I, and I'm in Europe. I also thought Goofus was a snide remark to put down 3e players, but that seems not to be the case.

Maybe someone can explain who Goofus and Gallant are?

Cheers!

Maggan

 

[BASHMAN]

Neither do I, and I'm in Europe. I also thought Goofus was a snide remark to put down 3e players, but that seems not to be the case.

Maybe someone can explain who Goofus and Gallant are?

Cheers!

Maggan

Goofus and Galant were characters in an American children's Magazine called "Highlights". I had it when I was a kid. The magazine had puzzles, stories, jokes, etc, and a collumn called Goofus and Gallant. It would basically show the two boys doing the same thing differently. Goofus was doing it wrong, and Gallant was doing it right.

Example: Goofus runs into his room to play video games right after dinner. Gallant offers to help clear the table and wash the dishes before playing games.

Stuff like that. I used that as an allegory for the merits of fast-play rules vs. rules-heavy gaming.

Personally, if I wanted to play something rules-heavy for the sake of realism, I would go with GURPS or CHAMPIONS. D&D is too complicated to be simply called "class based", but it is too simplified to be called "skills based". To some, it is a happy medium, but to others, I like one or the other. I guess to me, the perfect "happy medium" between skills based and class based gaming would be 7th sea (the old one, not the d20 version). Character generation took a while, like most skills based games, but gameplay was fast and easy, like a class based game. I just think that because d20 has so many rules it really slows the gameplay down.

 

[BASHMAN]

Fighter Variation

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.

Yes there is variation. It is called weapon choice. What weapon do you specialize in? Will you dual wield, use a two handed weapon, or weapon and shield? Yes, it does matter (especially in terms of weapon specialization) and fighters might be different from one another based on their "style".

 

[johnsemlak]

*** 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! ***

Neither did I

 

[nsruf]

Yes there is variation. It is called weapon choice. What weapon do you specialize in? Will you dual wield, use a two handed weapon, or weapon and shield? Yes, it does matter (especially in terms of weapon specialization) and fighters might be different from one another based on their "style".

Man, they totally ripped off feats

Seriously, the weapon style specializations were one of the few things in the AD&D2 fighters handbook which I liked. If C&C has something similar, I should be happy.

What about combat maneuvers like disarm, knockout, etc (in case you are allowed to talk about it)?

 

[johnsemlak]

Yes there is variation. It is called weapon choice. What weapon do you specialize in? Will you dual wield, use a two handed weapon, or weapon and shield? Yes, it does matter (especially in terms of weapon specialization) and fighters might be different from one another based on their "style".

That sounds somewhat cool. It's like allowing some of the figher feats, but just for fighters.

I wouldn't mind a system that gave special abilities that only fighters can take (perhaps allow them to other fighter-types). Bring more focus to the class.

 

[cleaverthepit]

First

WHY DIDN"T SOME OF YOU JOIN THE C AND C SOCIETY? ARRRRGH

It's not to late you know. Although almost everything is set in stone now, future products and development, supplements etc is still being discussed. And the society gets to decide what comes out. They have already decided we should write a Game Builders Guide. A sorta how take CandC and make it your own. How other rules sets can be incorporate and restructuring things to your needs/wants.

Aaaarg

I played my pirate again last night. I am going to steal another characters magical boat (the Swanmay) and run away to the Dreaming Sea so he can't use it He is going to beat my ***

 

[dsfriii]

Goofus and Galant were characters in an American children's Magazine called "Highlights". I had it when I was a kid. The magazine had puzzles, stories, jokes, etc, and a collumn called Goofus and Gallant. It would basically show the two boys doing the same thing differently. Goofus was doing it wrong, and Gallant was doing it right.

Example: Goofus runs into his room to play video games right after dinner. Gallant offers to help clear the table and wash the dishes before playing games.

Stuff like that. I used that as an allegory for the merits of fast-play rules vs. rules-heavy gaming.

Yeah, but if I remember correctly Goofus is drawned a bit more goofier than Galant and in some ways it is an underhanded way to say to the the kids look you do not want to be like dumb Goofus.

But that aside. Yeah creating a character can take some time in 3e. But I can also create one in 5 minutes just like C&C. It all in someways comes down to the DM and the way he controls his game. Like I said before C&C has some very nice aspects like the quick character creation. But who is to say a year from now C&C will have other option books that will make creating a character longer if the DM allows them?

This I want to say to both sides. C&C is not the be all end all of all RPG, (no matter what some fans have to say.) And C&C is not the anti-christ 3.x e only supporters because it is trying to be something different. I say everyone should take a look at it when it comes out or join the C&C society. The TLG guys have done a really nice job at coming up with the rules. So take a look and decide for yourself. And C&C fans not everyone one is a "Goofus" if they do not want to use C&C and stay with 3e. (I am still in denile that 3.5 exists....)

So how about a group hug....

 

[Particle_Man]

Can't stop all min maxing, players will be players and heck, some players play for the sake of min maxing.

In any respect, the adjustments are there, negative and positive. ranging from -2 to a +1.

I may not be able to stop min maxing, but I can certainly contain it. Let's see how modular and tinker-friendly C&C is.

Using the 3, 4-5, 6-8, 9-12, 13-15, 16-17, 18 system:

Particle_Man House Rule #1: A racial ability bonus raises that ability to the lowest number in the new penalty/bonus category. A racial ability penalty lowers that ability to the highest number in the new penalty/bonus category. Thus if you start with a 13 and get a bonus, it becomes 16, but if you start with a 15 and get a penalty, it becomes a 12. Exception: where the ability penalty is -2, then use the above house rule or lower the ability score 2 points, depending on which results in a lower ability score. (So an 18 would become 16, not 17, and a 16 would both become 14 while a 17 becomes 15).

The point is that I want the penalties and bonuses to be real penalties and bonuses, not hidden ones. I liked that feature about 3E, although I like the above stat system too, since it results in slightly less godlike characters.

Another option for -2 penalties, using the above house rule, is to change it to 2 separate -1 penalties, but I don't have enough info yet to make that call. The only character that I recall from 1st ed AD&D with a -2 was the half-orc with the Chr penalty, so that could easily split to Int and Chr penalties.

Another question: Do 3 and 18 act as absolute limits at character creation, or chould characters with certain races have 1, 2, or 19 in some stats? What are the bonuses/penalties for such extreme stats? How does giant strength work on this system?