Power Curve in C&C vs. D&D

[Sado]

In regular D&D, there is a HUGE difference in ability between high-level PC's and those just starting out, so much so that a low-level PC has pretty much zero chance of beating a high-level PC at anything.

I am liking Castles ansd Crusades, and I am wondering if the difference between high- and low-level PC's is as pronounced in that. I haven't gotten past 2nd level yet, so I can't say from experience. Can any of you guys with longer running C&C games offer any insight?

 

[der_kluge]

It seems lower to me, but I don't have a good feel for it, either.

It's much, much lower in HARP, which is one of its strong points. I realize you didn't ask about HARP, but I'll tell you anyway. It's so much lower in HARP, in fact, that it's perfectly conceivable that a 1st level warrior could kill a naked 20th level guy with one good attack. I say naked, because armor is damage reduction in HARP, so armor reduces the amount of damage from a weapon. And the amount of damage that a weapon does it more or less equal to the amount of hit points most people have at any given level. That is, the number of points you can stick into the weapon bonus more or less increases at the same level of progression that additional hit points increase. So, there's never a big disparity. It's one of the strongest aspects of the system, for those that like that, I suppose.

The combat in HARP is really complicated, though, which is the big negative, IMHO.

 

[Henry]

In regular D&D, there is a HUGE difference in ability between high-level PC's and those just starting out, so much so that a low-level PC has pretty much zero chance of beating a high-level PC at anything.

I am liking Castles ansd Crusades, and I am wondering if the difference between high- and low-level PC's is as pronounced in that. I haven't gotten past 2nd level yet, so I can't say from experience. Can any of you guys with longer running C&C games offer any insight?

The difference between a 1st and 10th level C&C character is VERY pronounced; between 10th and 20th, not so much. One of the main considerations is equipment and hit points, and all C&C characters stop hit dice accrual like AD&D characters around 10th level or so. Therefore, spells can't kill you any deader than they already do, it's just that it might take TWO 5th level spells to kill you versus one 9th level spell. Fighters only attack every so often, unlike in 3E, and I think the max rate of attack for a fighter is 2/round.

 

[Sado]

One of the main considerations is equipment...

Thanks for mentioning that. Does the expectation that PC's will have lots of cool magic/bonus-giving equipment carry over from D&D?

 

[Turanil]

Does the expectation that PC's will have lots of cool magic/bonus-giving equipment carry over from D&D?

I don't think so. As I see it C&C allows for low magic as much as for high magic. So it all depends on the individual DM. However, IMO this is also true for D&D 3e: if you give few magic items, you just ned to tone down the encounters.

 

[Akrasia]

It is worth mentioning that level progression is much slower in C&C than it is in 3e D&D. The rate of level progression in C&C is more like 1e AD&D. It should take over a year of regular play to get a 10th level character (whereas default 3e assumes that a PC will get to level 18-20 in the same time), and most PCs will retire around level 12. An 18th level character would be extremely unusual and exceptional.

 

[Mythmere1]

No, you're not expected to have the magic items. However, since the character abilities are much less powerful than in 3E, the ratio of personal capability to what you get from items might be about the same. I'm not sure on this yet.

Henry's right about the differences - the curve is more pronounced as you go up to tenth. It's a linear curve up to tenth, so first of all the percentage increase in hps from one additional die is higher as you go up at lower levels. At 10th, it switches to a small number per level, not rolling a die. So the percentage increase at each level gets even smaller.

Wizards are the exception. Since their power comes from spells more than hps and class abilities, their power continues to increase linearly all the way, and they become very dangerous at about 12th or 13th relative to the other party members. They need good bodyguarding though, because at this point whichever wizard fires first can toast another wizard with those low hit points. It gets hairy.

 

[bolie]

And the Con loss from being brought back to life really adds insult to injury on the hit points. We had a 10th-12th level party and my wizard could really deal out the damage. The problem was that two good hits from any appropriate foe would take him out.

My current character, a 4th level Monk, has almost twice as many hit points as my Wizard did.

Level advancement is painstaking.

I think magic items make a much bigger difference in C&C. For one thing, characters all have the same abilities (for each class), so one way of differentiating is through magic item selection. I haven't seen M&T, yet, so I don'tk now how the magic items work out, though.

Bolie IV

 

[Akrasia]

...
Level advancement is painstaking.
...

Well, only in contrast to the super-fast rate that serves as the default in d20/3e. Frankly, as someone who dislikes the notion that a teenager can go from country bumpkin to planar power in the span of a year, I find C&C's slower rate of progression quite refreshing.

Perhaps it is the influence of computer/video games, but I am regularly astonished that the rapid rate of level progression in d20/3e is considered 'normal' by players. (And these are the same players who promote d20/3e as achieving a greater degree of 'verisimilitude' than earlier editions!)
:\

 

[Turanil]

Frankly, as someone who dislikes the notion that a teenager can go from country bumpkin to planar power in the span of a year, I find C&C's slower rate of progression quite refreshing. <...> I am regularly astonished that the rapid rate of level progression in d20/3e is considered 'normal' by players.

Playability and verisimilitude are two different things. I agree with you and find irritating the idea of a "teenager going from country bumpkin to planar power in the span of a year"; on the other hand, I want to play my character (and as DM run characters) from 1st to at least 12th level in much less than three years of gaming, at a rate of once per week. At my age, I have difficulties finding people to play once a month, and players usually want to try different games and campaigns, so with XP progression by the book, no campaign will get past 3rd or 4th level. Anyway, I think I am going to solve the problem like this: a certain number of months and years pass between adventures, so the teenager has grown into a middle-aged man before becoming an epic level character.