Moving to C&C... need help

[Ourph]

Again, I am not misrepresenting anything. C&C may not list "feats", but using the SIEGE engine allows anyone to do anything the CK is willing to allow, including feat actions such as power attack, cleave, whirlwind, and meta magic feats. Read the examples given for using the SIEGE engine, anythng the player can think of doing the CK can allow, and apply whatever they consider to be appropriate modifiers.

Any RPG that calls for a human referee/judge/GM/etc. has the feature of "allow[ing] anyone to do anything the

GM: will allow". It's not a specific feature of either C&C or it's "SIEGE engine" mechanic. It is also not the same thing as having a Feat mechanic. So no misrepresentation whatsoever. Just a lack of understanding about the SIEGE engine and how much freedom it gives the players and CK in doing "anything they can imagine". I have a complete understanding of what the SIEGE engine can do, thanks. I've never claimed your implementation of feat-like mechanics in your game is impossible. But it is misrepresentation to claim that C&C provides rules that completely mimic the Feat system in D&D. C&C is not providing those rules in your game, you are. Something I have been doing in my C&C game for two years, so I am not misrepresenting anything. Exactly. YOU do it in YOUR game. Feat-like maneuvers are a feature of YOUR game, not the C&C rules or the SIEGE mechanic. The implementation of a feat-like system depends on a particular GM choosing to bring those options into his game, they are not an inherent part of the rules (even if the GM is using a mechanic within the rules, like the SIEGE mechanic, to help adjudicate it). Granting permission to "do anything you want" isn't the equivalent of actually establishing a rule that tells a GM at what ratio offensive focus and defensive focus are traded or that each subsequent attack after the first when striking multiple creatures in a Whirlwind Attack-like maneuver suffers a cumulative -1 penalty. Suggesting that such permission is equivalent is, IMO, obvious misrepresentation of reality.

 

[Treebore]

Doing actions, that are covered by feats in 3E are inehrent to the SIEGE mechanic, not something I imported.

The ONLY thing I imported about feats was to use them as "ideas" for my players to know what the SIEGE mechanic can allow them to do. The only "mechanics" I use are the SIEGE mechanics. The only things I use from feats in 3E is descriptions. to help my players understand what any character can attempt to do.


Once the CK and players understand what can be done with the SIEGE mechanic they never need to refer to the feat rules in 3E again.


So there are no feats used in C&C, they are SIEGE checks. Irregardless of "house rules", the SIEGE check can be used to allow anything to be attempted. Anything. All with one mechanic, the SIEGE mechanic. No feats, no skill lists. Nothing but your own imagination and inspirations.


Once the CK gets a handle on using the SIEGE engine you don't need to look up rules again. I don't even use the Grapple rules as written in C&C, simply because I prefer to use the SIEGE mechanic for Grappling the exact same way I use if for everything else.

The SIEGE mechanic is not the same mechanic of any other RPG I have ever played or read. I have played a lot of systems, but definitely not all, so maybe some exist, but it isn't in any edition of D&D, all of which I played for years. A minimum of 4 years playing each edition pretty much weekly.

So when I say it isn't the same it is not.

 

[Dragon-Slayer]

My players prefer C&C and enjoy not having Feats or Skills (the latter beyond Class abilities) simply because the game runs much faster and smoother without having to look up rules constantly. When we play C&C we are ready to just dive in, have fun, and roleplay. The story we tell becomes the focus, not the rules, which are streamlined enough to be picked up easily by newcomers.

There might be a bit of a misconception about C&C that it is just for those of us who played 1E, which is simply not true, players at my table run the gamut from grognards to people who have never played an rpg before.

Although I also run WFRP2 and The Burning Wheel, C&C is the most popular game because we can just pick it up and play a one off or a campaign.

 

[Ourph]

Doing actions, that are covered by feats in 3E are inehrent to the SIEGE mechanic, not something I imported.

The ONLY thing I imported about feats was to use them as "ideas" for my players to know what the SIEGE mechanic can allow them to do. The only "mechanics" I use are the SIEGE mechanics. The only things I use from feats in 3E is descriptions. to help my players understand what any character can attempt to do.

Fine... Hairfoot describes the mechanical requirements and effects of a Whirlwind Attack-like action in his post above.

If I were your GM, I'd do it like this:

Whirlwind is a pretty difficult, high level manoeuvre, even in D&D, so I'd give it a challenge level of about 28*, with strength being the applicable stat. So, if Fuggit the 8th level barbarian tried it, you'd roll D20, add Fuggit's strength bonus (+3), add his level (+8), and add six because strength is one of his prime stats.

So, if Fuggit rolls an 11 or more, he can take an attack at everyone surrounding him, with a -1 for each additional target after the first.

If he fails, he only gets a single attack, but if he fails by 10 or more (by rolling a 1), he fumbles. If Fuggit continues to use the manoeuvre in combat, it might get easier for him.

How do you handle the same thing in your game?

If you handle it exactly the same as Hairfoot, you are introducing mechanics that go beyond those specifically written in the C&C rules, because Hairfoot's methods aren't detailed in the rulebooks.

If you handle it differently you have just proven that adjudicating the mechanical effects of a feat in C&C is not inherently covered by the SIEGE mechanic, otherwise everyone who plays C&C would handle it the same way.

Which is it?

The SIEGE mechanic is not the same mechanic of any other RPG I have ever played or read. I have played a lot of systems, but definitely not all, so maybe some exist, but it isn't in any edition of D&D, all of which I played for years. A minimum of 4 years playing each edition pretty much weekly.

So when I say it isn't the same it is not.

The SIEGE mechanic is no more or less than a universal resolution mechanic. 3e has one (d20 + modifiers vs. target number), all the old Chaosium games have one (d100 to roll under a skill or ability number), Prince Valiant has one (flip a coin to decide all issues left to chance), Amber diceless has one (compare one of three scores for your character vs. the same score of his opponent, higher score wins). Universal mechanics have been around for quite some time and are hardly unique to C&C.

 

[Imaro]

Fine... Hairfoot describes the mechanical requirements and effects of a Whirlwind Attack-like action in his post above.


How do you handle the same thing in your game?

If you handle it exactly the same as Hairfoot, you are introducing mechanics that go beyond those specifically written in the C&C rules, because Hairfoot's methods aren't detailed in the rulebooks.

If you handle it differently you have just proven that adjudicating the mechanical effects of a feat in C&C is not inherently covered by the SIEGE mechanic, otherwise everyone who plays C&C would handle it the same way.

Which is it?

Actually, I would have to argue this point. Doing a "whirlwind attack" by the C&C rules would be a siege strength check, modified by ability modifier, his level, HD of opponents, any applicable modifiers a CK feels apply and whether it's prime or not.

So a 1st lvl Ftr with a +3 Str mod, a prime in Str and fighting Goblins(HD=1) would have to roll a 9 or higher(assuming the CK felt no additional difficulty was warranted...you know just like modifiers to DC's in 3.5) to pull of this maneuver against the goblins. These mechanics are exactly whats in C&C.

The only real difference I see is that the player is actually telling me what he's trying to accomplish, rather than selecting it from a pre-fabricated list.

As far as handling things differently...house rules don't exsist in D&D, and everyone chooses the exact same DC modifiers for every situation no matter what, huh? I think this is highly unlikely, the DM/CK makes judgement calls in both systems.

The SIEGE mechanic is no more or less than a universal resolution mechanic. 3e has one (d20 + modifiers vs. target number), all the old Chaosium games have one (d100 to roll under a skill or ability number), Prince Valiant has one (flip a coin to decide all issues left to chance), Amber diceless has one (compare one of three scores for your character vs. the same score of his opponent, higher score wins). Universal mechanics have been around for quite some time and are hardly unique to C&C.

Who said they were unique to C&C? Don't certain games(I know BRP and D&D do) that state certain things are impossible without the skill or training? C&C says go ahead and try it because it's up to your CK what is and isn't possible.

Besides you were arguing C&C doesn't have a mechanic in place that will allow players to mimic 3.5's feats...actually it does. The rulebook states a siege check can be made for any action. Does it guarantee succeess or that's it's even likely...nope I think that's a function for the GM's campaign world. If I'm running a wuxia type campaign...heck make a dex check to run up walls and you'll have a good chance at success. In a more historically based campaign, you can try it(though I would hope my players would respect the genre conventions of my campaign) but it's gonna be hard to nigh impossible to pull off.

 

[Hairfoot]

If you handle it exactly the same as Hairfoot, you are introducing mechanics that go beyond those specifically written in the C&C rules, because Hairfoot's methods aren't detailed in the rulebooks.

If you handle it differently you have just proven that adjudicating the mechanical effects of a feat in C&C is not inherently covered by the SIEGE mechanic, otherwise everyone who plays C&C would handle it the same way.

It's accurate to say C&C has no feats, but it's also accurate to say it has all feats, since the spirit of the game encourages players and GMs to try anything they wish. 3E was designed specifically for players and GMs who become paralysed if a situation crops up which isn't covered by a specific rule, but the resulting game has a density of rules and conditions which some of us find stifling. Others are happier with a system which allows the freedom of setting generic difficultiy scores against character stats.

I'm not certain what reply you're loooking for. Do you want a C&C fan to state that there is no formal system in C&C titled "feats"? If so, there you go. If, instead, you're looking for some concession that the encyclopaedia of rules in D&D allows characters to do things they can't in C&C, you're not likely to get it, because it's not true!

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I'd say this is a common misconception about C&C, and if you're switching to it, be wary.

Unlike more rules-heavy games, just because it isn't written on your character sheet doesn't mean you can't do it. If you convert characters with feats and such, they can still do them using the SIEGE engine. Heck, characters can try pretty much whatever the DM (or GM or CK or whatever) allows, suing the SIEGE engine.

For converted characters, I'd probably give them a bonus to their SIEGE role, or if they have signature feates/skills/abilities, I might make success automatic. (IIRC, Treebore does something similar, where after successfully performing a "feat-like" action many times, the character stops having to make a SIEGE to do that action.)

This is very interesting to me.

I had been ignoring C&C because everyone kept comparing it to earlier versions of D&D without mentioning this little tidbit. Now I'll certainly have to have a look at it!

 

[Delta]

So there are no feats used in C&C, they are SIEGE checks. Irregardless [sic] of "house rules", the SIEGE check can be used to allow anything to be attempted. Anything. All with one mechanic, the SIEGE mechanic. No feats, no skill lists.

So it sounds like we all agree. There are no feats and no skills in C&C.

 

[S'mon]

In reaction to 4e, I was thinking of taking my regular games, one set in Greyhawk, the other in eberron and possibly moving them to C&C. This seems ambitious but hpwo do I convert 3.x material into C&C material...

From http://www.goodmangames.com/forum.htm

Hello, my name is Chris Rutkowsky and I did the conversion of the Mysterious Tower from d20 to Castles and Crusades, and wrote an original module for C&C for Goodman Games.

Joe forwarded me an email in which a person wanted a guideline for converting a certain module (Crypt of the Devil Litch) to C&C. I personally don't have this module, however I can give you guys a quick guideline that I used myself to make things for Mysterious Tower work for C&C.

The easiest thing to convert is the monsters. All you need to do is look up the same monster in the C&C Monsters and Treasure book! You can mark the pages in the module and your M&T book with color coded sticky notes so that you always know what page to turn to in a hurry and don't have to bother with making notes.

If the monster you want to convert is not in the Monsters and Treasure Book, I would consult an older edition of D&D-- my personal favorite being the Basic D&D Rules Cyclopedia. If you don't have it you can buy the pdf for 5 dollars at rpgnow.com or buy a used one on ebay.

The monsters presented in the RC are 90% compatable with C&C rules. The only thing that you would need to actively convert is armor class and saving throws. To convert D&DRC armor class to C&C, simply subtract the given AC from 19. Remember that subtracting a negative number is the same thing as addition. So a D&D monster listed as AC 5 would be AC 14 in C&C (19-5= 14). A monster with AC -3 would become AC 22 in C&C (19+3 =22). Saves are easier to convert. If the creature saves as a fighter, thief, dwarf, or halfling it is Physical prime. If it saves as an elf, cleric, or wizard it is mental prime. Use the creatures HD as the bonus to all rolls (including saves, attacks, etc). Simple, eh?

If using 1st or 2nd Edition AD&D as a resource, armor class is also easy to manage. Simply subtract the listed AC from 20. So an AC 5 creature would be AC 15 in C&C and an AC -3 character would be AC 23 in C&C. Saves convert the same as in basic D&D.

If you want to convert DIRECTLY from d20 system, use the same Hit Dice and die type as the creature already has, but get rid of the bonus hit points. So a creature listed as 5d10+15 HD in d20 would convert to 5d10 in C&C. You should also take away any bonuses to the damage dice listed. If the bonus listed is higher than the die, just make the attack use the die type, and double it. So a creature listed as doing d4+5 damage, change it to 2d4. If a creature had d6+3 dmg, just convert it to d6. These changes are because hit points and damage are harder to come by in C&C than they are in d20. If a creature's good saves are FORT or REF, it is Physical prime. If it is WILL the creature is mental prime. If they are all good saves, it is physical and mental prime.

Converting Saves
Older editions of D&D had 5 saving throws. C&C has 6 and they are just about the same, except the C&C saves are directly linked to stats. The old D&D saves were as follows and converts to C&C as presented below:

Paralysis-- Str
Breath Weapon (and area of affect spells like fireball)-- Dex
Poison, Death-- Con
Wands, Staves, Wands (and Illusions)-- INT
Spells (except illusions and area of affect spells like fireball and charm or sleep spells)-- WIS
Enchantment spells (sleep, charm, etc) and fear= CHA

Converting d20 saves is a little trickier and involves a judgement call by the CK converting it. You just have to use some logic as to which converts to what.

FORT-- STR or CON (depending on the effect)
REF-- DEX
WILL--INT, WIS, or CHA (Depending on the source of the spell/effect, CK's call)

Converting DCs to Challenge Levels.

I use a simple formula for this. I assume that DC 15 is the average DC of a check in d20. In C&C, the average difficulty of a task is CL 0. So every 1 the DC is higher than 15 in D20, the CL is 1 higher. So a DC 19 check would convert to a CL 4 check. For every 1 the DC is lower than 15 in D&D, the CL is -1. So a DC 12 check would be CL -3 in C&C. The CL of course is added to the base of 12/18 depending on if the character is prime in the required stat.

Converting Skill Checks
Simply make the skill check into an attribute check for the skill that is normally tied to that attribute. You may want to give certain classes a bonus in this, or even restrict who can try based on class. For instance a Search check would simply convert to an INT check, which anybody can do, but a Survival check to track somebody should be limited to rangers or maybe druids (with a penalty as it is not a class ability for them).

Converting damage from traps--
If the trap is related to a spell, look up the C&C equivilent and adjust the effect accordingly.

If the damage is related to a weapon, look up that weapons damage in C&C and convert it.

If damage is listed as a die with a damage bonus exceeding the die types, add another die to the damage instead. If it has a damage bonus less than the die type, get rid of the bonus damage.

So if a trap is listed as doing 5d6+7 damage, convert it to 6d6 damage for C&C. If it does 5d6+4 damage, it just does 5d6.

Well, that is all that comes to mind for now. Let me know if you think of any other questions about conversion.
_________________

 

[Delta]

Hello, my name is Chris Rutkowsky and I did the conversion of the Mysterious Tower from d20 to Castles and Crusades, and wrote an original module for C&C for Goodman Games...

Chris thanks for posting that -- very interesting and extra insight into the C&C game for a current non-player like me.