Seriously considering Castles & Crusades: How much does it differ from 3.X?

[S'mon]

Yeah your right, I was reading what you posted totally wrong. so then would it be subtract 15 from the DC? so that a DC 20 would be CB + (CL of 5)? And anything beneath DC 15 would be automatic in C&C?

Yes, I'd say that was right. C&C does let you use negative CLs if you want, but also says not to roll unless it's something the PC might well faill at. GMing it I've found it works best, and seems to be within the RAW, to say that where:

1. The CL is below 0 because of inherent easiness or circumstantial modifiers

AND

2. The task is within the PC's area of expertise, so they'd succeed on a roll of '10'+

THEN

The PC can 'take 10' and automatically succeed.

This avoids pratfalls where the supposedly uber-competent PC fails at routine tasks.

 

[S'mon]

Honestly guys, if you are so concerned with the math then C&C is not going to float your boat.

We're just looking at how you convert 3e scenarios to C&C on the fly, without setting the difficulty numbers much too high or low. It's not rocket science, and you could just ignore the listed 3e DCs, but they're handy for differentiating 'tough lock' from 'easy lock'.

 

[Piratecat]

Treebore, if you have a problem with moderation, please take it to email.

Thread closed at the request of the OP.