Breakdaddy
First Post
Mythmere1 said:
HIPAA is the bane of my existence. I am a network admin at the state hospital here and all the new protocols and required encryption are giving me ulcers.
My C&C campaign is kicking some major butt
- Thread starter Akrasia
- Start date
HIPAA is the bane of my existence. I am a network admin at the state hospital here and all the new protocols and required encryption are giving me ulcers.
I had a similar experience in my last 3e campaign once it reached ca 10th level, running it became a chore rather than a joy. I'm enjoying my current 3.5 campaign a lot, though PCs are currently only level 1-2. I'm running Lost City of Barakus, I think 3.5 with a few tweaks (mostly rules from Conan RPG) should work fine up to ca level 7 or 8, when LCoB is done I'll take stock and see if I want to continue the campaign using 3.5 rules, one possibility might be to switch to C&C - I'm already using C&C a lot for inspiration in current game, helping me keep in the rules-light mindset - possibly see if the players would like to convert their PCs over to C&C for high-level play. If I did that I'd need to change PCs' levels to take account that eg a C&C Rogue is weaker & needs less XP than a 3e one, I'd probably use Fighter as base and lower Wizard, raise Rogue, etc.
Dragonhelm
Knight of Solamnia
I remember one time having a lady in my game who was explaining how a coup de grace worked in 3e. By the time she was done explaining the intricacies of it. By the time she was done, one of my players (who I have gamed with for years) and I were both a bit disgusted by it.
In the time it took her to explain it, I could have just gone with a saving throw and moved on.
Of course, I always felt bad after that since that's one of my last memories of her. She got in a car wreck and didn't survive.
Anyway, point is that this experience as well as a few others really soured me on 3e combat. I've had a certain style that I've used for years, and 3e's combat doesn't mesh well with that. So I'm considering adopting C&C combat for my D&D games. Granted, that would mean tweaks all around. *sigh*
In the time it took her to explain it, I could have just gone with a saving throw and moved on.
Of course, I always felt bad after that since that's one of my last memories of her. She got in a car wreck and didn't survive.
Anyway, point is that this experience as well as a few others really soured me on 3e combat. I've had a certain style that I've used for years, and 3e's combat doesn't mesh well with that. So I'm considering adopting C&C combat for my D&D games. Granted, that would mean tweaks all around. *sigh*
Last edited:
Gomez
First Post
Player: Can I just kill the guy as he is lying there on the ground? I haven't read any of the rules so I don't know.
GM: Well you Coup de Grace a helpless opponent. It is a full round action that provokes an OOA. You automatically hit and critical with the attack. If you don't kill them with the attack then he/she has a to make a Fortitude save of 10 plus your damage or die.
Player: Can I Coup de Grace a golem or a vampire?
GM: No. If the target is immune to criticals you cannot Coup de Grace them.
Player: Can I Coup de Grace with bow.
GM: Yes if you’re right next to the target.
Player: Can I add my sneak attack damage to the attack?
GM: Yes.
Player: Thanks. Now that I know the rule and I will not have to keep asking you everytime.
GM: Well you Coup de Grace a helpless opponent. It is a full round action that provokes an OOA. You automatically hit and critical with the attack. If you don't kill them with the attack then he/she has a to make a Fortitude save of 10 plus your damage or die.
Player: Can I Coup de Grace a golem or a vampire?
GM: No. If the target is immune to criticals you cannot Coup de Grace them.
Player: Can I Coup de Grace with bow.
GM: Yes if you’re right next to the target.
Player: Can I add my sneak attack damage to the attack?
GM: Yes.
Player: Thanks. Now that I know the rule and I will not have to keep asking you everytime.
Last edited:
I was right with you, Gomez, up until the last line. Have you ever actually played this game for any length of time? 
It goes more like this.
Six weeks later:
Six weeks later:
Six weeks later:
It goes more like this.
Six weeks later:
Six weeks later:
Six weeks later:
Player: Can I just kill the guy as he is lying there on the ground? I haven't read any of the rules so I don't know.
GM: AAAAAHHHHHHHH!!!
Gomez
First Post
Yuan-Ti said:I was right with you, Gomez, up until the last line. Have you ever actually played this game for any length of time?
Not long, just about 28 years I guess.
Any way Yuan-Ti, your right on the money there though! 
We have a player in our group who has played for years and he still cannot figure out his attack and damage bonus. :\
We move on to our next Castles & Crusades session this weekend (the 7th, I think). Gotta whip up the map of a multi-baron county, and also work up some political details on the evil swamp city and get a rapid response plan for the evil demi god.
Also work up stats for all the relevant monsters in the demi-god's counterattack and probably for at least one baron's forces, which adds another ten minutes. Fifteen, if I decide to invent a new monster.
I love being able to focus on the campaign and the plotline again...
Also work up stats for all the relevant monsters in the demi-god's counterattack and probably for at least one baron's forces, which adds another ten minutes. Fifteen, if I decide to invent a new monster.
I love being able to focus on the campaign and the plotline again...
Akrasia
Procrastinator
MrFilthyIke said:
I guess my group is just too damn slow. :\
Anyway, I do think that particular rules systems have an affect on game play. To assert otherwise just strikes me as absurd.
With 3e D&D, rules questions kept coming up during play. These questions concerned: feats, spells, special abilities, skills questions, combat actions (especially whether doing something provokes an attack of opportunity or not), circumstance modifiers, etc.
Over time, some of these questions came up less frequently, as we became more familiar with the system. On the other hand, as the PCs and NPCs gained experience, they had access to new abilities, actions, and so forth. This lead to new rules questions stopping play.
Now I suppose I could have made it my mission to become a complete 'master' of the 3.5 rules by memorizing all of them. But such a task would have been: (a.) very time consuming (I also have a job, other interests, etc.); and (b.) insanely boring.
Most important: it is very difficult, IME, to run 3e combats without a game board. In terms of my experience of the game, breaking out the game board, setting things up, etc. detracts from my enjoyment of the game. It is as simple as that.
The more complex the rules system, the less likely the rules can 'fade into the background' during play.
What is so hard to understand about that?
(Again, some people like these kinds of games -- I am not criticizing other people's tastes here. I am just expressing what I like, and how C&C better helps me to realize that in games that I run.)
Gomez said:
At the bottom is a full entry, which as you can see, doesn't look TOO terribly different from 3E stats. The simplicity comes from the fact that when you're at the table you know a great deal of relevant info about the monster just from its hit dice. When you've got the HD in your notes, that tells you the attack bonus and the saving throw numbers (to do the saves you also have to know if the "prime stats" are P, M, or both). So my stat blocks usually have AC, HD, move (b/c we use minis in our game - some C&Cers don't), plus notes on whatever special abilities. Noting special abilities is about the same as 3E, but reduced somewhat in complexity because the saving throw a monster's abilities require is also determined by HD. Much of the simplicity, other than having lots of mechanics stem from HD, also comes from the fact that anything ELSE is just a special ability. You don't have to check under skills, feats, special attacks, and special defenses when you're figuring out what the monster does in its next turn. You can sort of see the monster's "whizz-bang" capabilities all together. This monster's not a great example, since it has only one.
I think of the monsters as "cardboard" compared to the 3E monsters: they don't follow the same rules as characters. They're a prop for the DM, not an intergral part of the system.
The monster below is one I made: you can see that it breaks lots of 3E rules to achieve a certain effect - you'd need to make some decisions in 3E about a construct that's specifically animated by an undead spirit: treat like one, the other, or both. In C&C, it's a lot less jarring than in 3E to just say that the undead spirit is immune to turning effects, although you could do it in 3E, obviously.
Makina (plural Makinoi)
Size: M
HD: 4d12 (avg 26)
Move: 30 ft.
AC: 20
Attacks: two weapons (by weapon) or 2 fists (1d6)
Special: Immune to all spells except force spells
Saves: P
Int: Non
Alignment: Neutral
Type: Construct
Treasure: None
XP: 140+4 (avg. 244 total)
Makinoi are suits of armor animated from within by a trapped spirit. They are used in the armies or bodyguards of evil wizards or clerics willing to enslave a soul to the task of inhabiting the armor. When a Makina is destroyed, its armor falls in useless pieces to the ground, and the trapped soul escapes. It cannot be turned as undead.
Last edited:
