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

[S'mon]

Yeah, the few times I looked at a DC to TN comparison I did feel that if I needed to I could use the 3E DC modifiers as a guideline. Usually only needing to adjust it up or down by a couple of points to be closer to what I thought was appropriate for the base TN's of the SIEGe in comparison to the base DC 10 of 3E.

Let's try a quick comparison:

1st level 3e character (Rogue, say) with a 16 (+3) stat will have 4 skill ranks in an area of expertise, bonus 3+4=7, so rolls d20+7.

1st level C&C character with a 16 (+2) stat will have a Prime in that area, effective +6, bonus 1+2+6=9, so rolls d20+9.

Both go up 1/level, though the 3e character will get stat bonuses at 4th & 8th, is more likely to get stat-buff items, and stats are uncapped. They can take skill focus feats, but rarely do.

Overall, it looks like converting a low level 3e adventure to C&C you should add 2 to the DCs for the C&C CC if you want to keep the difficulty identical, at mid level (ca 4-10) they stay about the same, and high level (11+) adventures will need DCs reducing.

Edit: I do think there's a difference in design philosophy re checks; 3e uses more frequent checks where success is likely, with take-10 for auto-success, C&C GMing advice says only roll for major stuff, and success is harder. Things that in 3e would be DC 10-14 skill checks seem to be the kind of thing that in C&C a character should succeed at automatically if within his area of expertise.

Saving throws are different; C&C uses a unified mechanic where skills and saves are treated identically, whereas in 3e saving throw bonuses are much lower than skill bonuses in most cases. Where the C&C DEX 16 Rogue-1 effectively rolls d20+9 on a DEX save, going up +1/level, the 3e Rogue-1 rolls d20+5 (+2 good save, +3 DEX), going up 1/2 levels. With C&C saves, in converting from 3e you should use the attacker's hit dice/caster level (18+CL)or for traps probably use the listed level of the scenario as the CL (CC=18+CL), but adding 5 to the 3e DC would probably work ok too.

 

[Treebore]

To be fair, if one has to add anything not present by design in order to make one system dovetail with another, the two systems in question aren't "fully compatible" by virtue of basic English language definitions. Fully compatible products don't require alteration to work together at 100% mechanical efficiency.



Also to be fair, that does sound pretty condescending -- the fact is that just because people don't do things your preferred way doesn't mean that they don't understand something. It just means that they do it different than you prefer. To suggest that they're uneducated because they don't do things your way is a textbook example of condescension.

When someone does not know how to play a character in a unique manner they are uneducated. 3E is a great system to start learning how a class can be made to feel different. So 3E is a way to become educated.

Hopefully, at some point, they will have developed ideas and even experimented with how to play unique characters aside from mechanical choices like skills and feats.

Then, if they ever want to challenge themselves by seeing how different a character they can play without the mechanical crutches of 3E, they can try it with less mechanically heavy systems like C&C.

So I am not being condescending. I am talking factually, and giving a road map that people can choose to follow, or not, in order to figure such things out.

Just like I used to do as an Instructor in the NAvy and as a High School Science teacher.

The way you two are reacting I must have crushed thousands of teenage ego's when I told them that they were in my class to become educated about higher levels of Science.

 

[Piratecat]

So I am not being condescending.

In fact, Treebore, you're being extremely condescending and insulting as well. Do not post in this thread from this point forward.

 

[Umbran]

So his reading comprehension is apparently somewhat limited.

You might not want to talk about that until you've reread The Rules regarding personal attacks and insults. You might also want to double-check Morrus' post about how, due to behavior around here recently, we have a really, really low tolerance.

Personal insults will not be tolerated from anyone, so I strongly recommend folks reconsider going down this path any further.

 

[Piratecat]

Simulmod!

 

[Imaro]

Let's try a quick comparison:

1st level 3e character (Rogue, say) with a 16 (+3) stat will have 4 skill ranks in an area of expertise, bonus 3+4=7, so rolls d20+7.

1st level C&C character with a 16 (+2) stat will have a Prime in that area, effective +6, bonus 1+2+6=9, so rolls d20+9.

Both go up 1/level, though the 3e character will get stat bonuses at 4th & 8th, is more likely to get stat-buff items, and stats are uncapped. They can take skill focus feats, but rarely do.

Overall, it looks like converting a low level 3e adventure to C&C you should add 2 to the DCs for the C&C CC if you want to keep the difficulty identical, at mid level (ca 4-10) they stay about the same, and high level (11+) adventures will need DCs reducing.

Edit: I do think there's a difference in design philosophy re checks; 3e uses more frequent checks where success is likely, with take-10 for auto-success, C&C GMing advice says only roll for major stuff, and success is harder. Things that in 3e would be DC 10-14 skill checks seem to be the kind of thing that in C&C a character should succeed at automatically if within his area of expertise.

Saving throws are different; C&C uses a unified mechanic where skills and saves are treated identically, whereas in 3e saving throw bonuses are much lower than skill bonuses in most cases. Where the C&C DEX 16 Rogue-1 effectively rolls d20+9 on a DEX save, going up +1/level, the 3e Rogue-1 rolls d20+5 (+2 good save, +3 DEX), going up 1/2 levels. With C&C saves, in converting from 3e you should use the attacker's hit dice/caster level (18+CL)or for traps probably use the listed level of the scenario as the CL (CC=18+CL), but adding 5 to the 3e DC would probably work ok too.

Hey S'mon what about this...a DC=10 is a base level check in most cases, so (DC of 10)=(CL of 0)or prime=12, non-prime=18(or basically subtract 10 from DC and add remainder to the check in C&C).

since it's a linear scale each +1 higher than DC 10 is a +1 added to the CL of a C&C character. Easy as pie and takes into consideration the higher (+2)average roll of a C&C character since their checks start two higher anyway. So that it ends up being the same chance of success.

So the formula for converting a DC to CL is just subtract ten and add reminder to Challenge Base.

 

[S'mon]

Hey S'mon what about this...a DC=10 is a base level check in most cases, so (DC of 10)=(CL of 0)or prime=12, non-prime=18(or basically subtract 10 from DC and add remainder to the check in C&C).

since it's a linear scale each +1 higher than DC 10 is a +1 added to the CL of a C&C character. Easy as pie and takes into consideration the higher (+2)average roll of a C&C character since their checks start two higher anyway. So that it ends up being the same chance of success.

So the formula for converting a DC to CL is just subtract ten and add reminder to Challenge Base.

My feeling from my analysis above is that a 3e DC 10 isn't really the same as a C&C CL 0 (CC 12/18). The real equivalent of C&C CL 0 is more like DC 15, not DC 10.

For skills:

The example 1st level 3e Rogue rolls d20+7 on his skill check, he beats a DC 10 on a 3+, a DC 15 on an 8+.

The example 1st level C&C Rogue rolls d20+3 on his skill check, vs a CC 12 (or effectively d20+9 vs CC 18, factoring in the Prime) he beats the target number on a 9+.

For saves:

3e Rogue rolls DEX save d20+5, beats a 10 on a 5+, beats a 15 on a 10+.

C&C Rogue rolls DEX save d20+3 again, vs a CC 12 (or effectively d20+9 vs CC 18, factoring in the Prime) he beats the target number on a 9+.

So for 3e, a DC 15 is 1 pt easier on skills, 1 pt harder on saves, than C&C CL 0.

 

[Imaro]

My feeling from my analysis above is that a 3e DC 10 isn't really the same as a C&C CL 0 (CC 12/18). The real equivalent of C&C CL 0 is more like DC 15, not DC 10.

For skills:

The example 1st level 3e Rogue rolls d20+7 on his skill check, he beats a DC 10 on a 3+, a DC 15 on an 8+.

The example 1st level C&C Rogue rolls d20+3 on his skill check, vs a CC 12 (or effectively d20+9 vs CC 18, factoring in the Prime) he beats the target number on a 9+.

For saves:

3e Rogue rolls DEX save d20+5, beats a 10 on a 5+, beats a 15 on a 10+.

C&C Rogue rolls DEX save d20+3 again, vs a CC 12 (or effectively d20+9 vs CC 18, factoring in the Prime) he beats the target number on a 9+.

So for 3e, a DC 15 is 1 pt easier on skills, 1 pt harder on saves, than C&C CL 0.

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?

 

[mhensley]

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

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

C&C is a fun game but it does different stuff than D20. I enjoy C&C and D20 but my players for the most part want more options than C&C has.