Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ourph" data-source="post: 3741952" data-attributes="member: 20239">Stating that "in C&C, all characters have all feats" is, at best, an unclear statement of that sentiment.  When it was pointed out that feats can only be replicated by the SIEGE engine if the DM and players draw on sources outside the rules to supply the mechanical effects Treebore didn't acknowledge the distinction or clarify his earlier statements, he reasserted that the statement was 100% accurate.  I agree with your above analysis of the function of the SIEGE mechanic completely, but I still think the claim that "in C&C, all characters have all feats" is misleading and is directly contradictory to the description of the SIEGE mechanic you outline above.I have no problem with creative input being a central part of the rules.  My problem is with the assertion that heavy reliance on creative input is somehow equivalent to concrete rules.  It does C&C no good to mislead people into thinking they're going to get feats (a mechanic with specific features which include, among other things, concrete enumeration of mechanical effects) when C&C doesn't provide and never intended to provide that kind of mechanic.  The problem with tankschmidt's analysis is that he makes it sound as if the rules support those "cool moves" equally in all games.  The fact that incorporation of those "cool moves" depends entirely on DM discretion changes the picture drastically.  When a customer buys C&C, they are not buying a DM, they are buying a rulebook.  So unless tankschmidt can guarantee that every person who runs a C&C game is going to allow every one of those "cool moves" he's speaking about, his assertion is, at best, wildly optimisitic.I think the CoC example is quite accurate.  There is a level of "creative input" where you are incorporating so much additional data into the play of the game (beyond what the rules provide) that describing the core rules as being adequate on their own to handle that play experience strains the bounds of credulity.  I would place building spaceships in Call of Cthulhu and incorporating ALL the mechanical effects of ALL 3e D&D feats into a C&C game at the same level.  Both require so much creative input from the DM and players that claiming the core rules alone provide enough information to support a game that uses those options is misleading.</blockquote>

Verification