Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="amethal" data-source="post: 7406256" data-attributes="member: 22784">I have the 7th printing, and there is a (very minor) typo on the contents page that has been there since the first printing.It looks like a straightforward and streamlined game, but unfortunately I have never had an opportunity to play it. I do have a lot of issues with the &quot;tone&quot; of the players handbook, but I've never really seen it discussed anywhere so it's probably just me.For example, there are half a dozen or so player character races, but if someone wants to play a half orc then no one can play a dwarf as dwarves will not adventure with half orcs. Half orcs don't like other half orcs, because they have first hand knowledge of how half orcs are not to be trusted. The few races which give half orcs the benefit of the doubt (goblins and kobolds) are said to do so only because they are too dumb to realise you should never give a half orc an even break.Ability scores are supposed to be generated in the &quot;old school, let the dice fall where they may&quot; manner, but some of the example characters in the book have 18s and 19s in some of their scores and below average scores are very much the exception (and certainly no 3s and 4s).One of the examples of play has two rangers wanting to cross a river. The GM rules that one of them can't swim, since before he became an adventurer he grew up in a desert. I don't know how you are supposed to tell if the average C&amp;C character can swim. However, being able to swim is actually in the ranger class description as a class ability. If an actual GM used something as general as &quot;grew up in the desert&quot; in my character's backstory to delete one of his class abilities I would not be happy.Obviously, in my own game I'd be free to not have half orcs be treated as pariahs (or just remove them altogether as a PC race), and I'd allow all rangers to be able to swim. However, it would be nice if I didn't have to.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="amethal, post: 7406256, member: 22784"] I have the 7th printing, and there is a (very minor) typo on the contents page that has been there since the first printing. It looks like a straightforward and streamlined game, but unfortunately I have never had an opportunity to play it. I do have a lot of issues with the "tone" of the players handbook, but I've never really seen it discussed anywhere so it's probably just me. For example, there are half a dozen or so player character races, but if someone wants to play a half orc then no one can play a dwarf as dwarves will not adventure with half orcs. Half orcs don't like other half orcs, because they have first hand knowledge of how half orcs are not to be trusted. The few races which give half orcs the benefit of the doubt (goblins and kobolds) are said to do so only because they are too dumb to realise you should never give a half orc an even break. Ability scores are supposed to be generated in the "old school, let the dice fall where they may" manner, but some of the example characters in the book have 18s and 19s in some of their scores and below average scores are very much the exception (and certainly no 3s and 4s). One of the examples of play has two rangers wanting to cross a river. The GM rules that one of them can't swim, since before he became an adventurer he grew up in a desert. I don't know how you are supposed to tell if the average C&C character can swim. However, being able to swim is actually in the ranger class description as a class ability. If an actual GM used something as general as "grew up in the desert" in my character's backstory to delete one of his class abilities I would not be happy. Obviously, in my own game I'd be free to not have half orcs be treated as pariahs (or just remove them altogether as a PC race), and I'd allow all rangers to be able to swim. However, it would be nice if I didn't have to. [/QUOTE]

Verification