Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Irda Ranger" data-source="post: 3734970" data-attributes="member: 1003">Yeah, but C&amp;C doesn't make you house rule anything to attempt most Feats.&nbsp; People who like C&amp;C, and want to introduce it to new players, just want to make it clear that house rules aren't necessary in this context - just a little player imagination and GM good judgment. The system already has the SIEGE Engine, and that's pretty much all you need.&nbsp; The only two missing ingredients are a CL* and the relevant Stat.Player: &quot;I cast Fireball, but I change a word in the spell on the fly to make it explode Acid instead of Fire.&quot;CK: &quot;Ok.&nbsp; That's an Int check with a CL of 24.&nbsp; Roll.&quot;Player: rolls. &quot;I got an 9, plus 6 for Prime**, plus 2 for my Int, plus 7 for level - just made it!&quot;CK: &quot;Cool. The asbestos-armored ogres do their best Wicked Witch impression and melt into little slimey pools.&quot;The above example shows how a Feat can be replicated using the rules in the game.&nbsp; Since doing &quot;arcane spell stuff&quot; is almost always and Int check, really the only thing the game leaves to the GM is determining (a) whether that action is possible at all, given his world's game (meta)physics, and (b) what the CL is.&nbsp; For instance, if a player said &quot;I jump from the ground up through the 3rd floor window&quot;, the GM needn't set a CL at all - he can just say it simply isn't possible.Now, if the CK wishes, he can certainly &quot;bolt on&quot; additional rules, like specifying that failing rolls that resemble D&amp;D metamagic feats triggers a wild surge, or whatever, but there's certainly no requirement that he do so.*- CL is the C&amp;C word for what D&amp;D calls a DC, and just like in D&amp;D, the DM determines the CL, often on the fly.&nbsp; There is no list anywhere in the C&amp;C book which specifies what CL's are appropriate for changing Fire spells to Acid spells on the fly, but there's also no rule that says you can't do it sans the appropriate Feat.&nbsp; Rather than attempt to predict every possible action that the player's might attempt, C&amp;C trusts its GM's to make up a CL (and grant modifiers or penalties appropriate to the circumstances) on the spot which are fair and fun.** - a common house rule, and one I used when I ran C&amp;C.This is partly right, and partly wrong.&nbsp; It's incorrect insofar as characters do have &quot;special training.&quot;&nbsp; It's represented by their Primes and their class.&nbsp; A Fighter with DEX Prime will be able to do certain things with greater ease than a character who isn't a Fighter and/or isn't DEX prime.&nbsp; No &quot;bolting&quot; necessary.If you mean that C&amp;C does not have rules allowing you to further distinguish class members who have the same Primes, then you're right.&nbsp; It does not provide that granular a level of detail.&nbsp; I thought it would be a cool house rule to allow people to spend XP on stuff other than level advancement (usually a permanent bonus to SIEGE Engine checks of a certain type, such as Turning Undead, or metamagic-like stuff, or a class ability), but that would be a house rule, and not core to C&amp;C. I might recommend a XP cost equal to 5% of what you need to level up for each +1 to your roll, but that hasn't been playtested or anything.This is one of the reasons I dropped out of C&amp;C (that an demands on my time from non-RPG sources).&nbsp; It annoyed me that a CHR Prime Fighter or Rogue could never improve at Disguise beyond &quot;CHR bonus +6&quot;, since Disguise was a class ability reserved for Illusionists.&nbsp; That and a few other &quot;OD&amp;D/AD&amp;D anachronisms&quot; which were retained for &quot;feel&quot; but I think are bad system designs. But that goes beyond our scope here.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Irda Ranger, post: 3734970, member: 1003"] Yeah, but C&C doesn't make you house rule anything to attempt most Feats. People who like C&C, and want to introduce it to new players, just want to make it clear that house rules aren't necessary in this context - just a little player imagination and GM good judgment. The system already has the SIEGE Engine, and that's pretty much all you need. The only two missing ingredients are a CL* and the relevant Stat. Player: "I cast [I]Fireball[/I], but I change a word in the spell on the fly to make it explode Acid instead of Fire." CK: "Ok. That's an Int check with a CL of 24. Roll." Player: [I]rolls[/I]. "I got an 9, plus 6 for Prime**, plus 2 for my Int, plus 7 for level - just made it!" CK: "Cool. The asbestos-armored ogres do their best Wicked Witch impression and melt into little slimey pools." The above example shows how a Feat can be replicated using the rules in the game. Since doing "arcane spell stuff" is almost always and Int check, really the only thing the game leaves to the GM is determining (a) whether that action is possible at all, given his world's game (meta)physics, and (b) what the CL is. For instance, if a player said "I jump from the ground up through the 3rd floor window", the GM needn't set a CL at all - he can just say it simply isn't possible. Now, if the CK wishes, he can certainly "bolt on" additional rules, like specifying that failing rolls that resemble D&D metamagic feats triggers a wild surge, or whatever, but there's certainly no requirement that he do so. *- CL is the C&C word for what D&D calls a DC, and just like in D&D, the DM determines the CL, often on the fly. There is no list anywhere in the C&C book which specifies what CL's are appropriate for changing Fire spells to Acid spells on the fly, but there's also no rule that says you can't do it sans the appropriate Feat. Rather than attempt to predict every possible action that the player's might attempt, C&C trusts its GM's to make up a CL (and grant modifiers or penalties appropriate to the circumstances) on the spot which are fair and fun. ** - a common house rule, and one I used when I ran C&C. This is partly right, and partly wrong. It's incorrect insofar as characters do have "special training." It's represented by their Primes and their class. A Fighter with DEX Prime will be able to do certain things with greater ease than a character who isn't a Fighter and/or isn't DEX prime. No "bolting" necessary. If you mean that C&C does not have rules allowing you to further distinguish class members who have the same Primes, then you're right. It does not provide that granular a level of detail. I thought it would be a cool house rule to allow people to spend XP on stuff other than level advancement (usually a permanent bonus to SIEGE Engine checks of a certain type, such as Turning Undead, or metamagic-like stuff, or a class ability), but that would be a house rule, and not core to C&C. I might recommend a XP cost equal to 5% of what you need to level up for each +1 to your roll, but that hasn't been playtested or anything. This is one of the reasons I dropped out of C&C (that an demands on my time from non-RPG sources). It annoyed me that a CHR Prime Fighter or Rogue could never improve at Disguise beyond "CHR bonus +6", since Disguise was a class ability reserved for Illusionists. That and a few other "OD&D/AD&D anachronisms" which were retained for "feel" but I think are bad system designs. But that goes beyond our scope here. [/QUOTE]

Verification