Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Akrasia" data-source="post: 2426242" data-attributes="member: 23012">As others have pointed out, C&C is hardly the only ‘rules light’ game around (and is really only ‘light’ relative to 3e and AD&D –- it is ‘rules medium’ compared to the range of games available).  Nonetheless, I have a few remarks:C&C is meant to realize a specific genre and play style – namely, ‘old school’ D&D and AD&D.  You can definitely ‘tweak’ C&C in many ways – and I tried to do capture a novel ‘feel’ for my  own campaign – but it is definitely strongly tied to this genre and style.  (In doing so, it is also meant to provide a faster and lighter alternative to 3e, but it is not meant to be ‘d20 lite’.)It seems that you don’t like ‘old school’ style D&D/AD&D.  Fair enough.  Myself, I like some of that ‘Isle of Dread’ and ‘Descent into the Depths of the Earth’ fun every so often.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />I actually think you are overstating this.  There are combat options in C&C.  While most may not be useful in ‘standard’ situations, some of those options will be extremely useful in certain situations.But yeah, a fan of detailed tactical combat is not going to like C&C.See my earlier reply regarding C&C’s purpose.  Also, I think it is really important to realize that all of the ‘C&C RAW’ are not available yet.  The CKG will include a number of options and variant rules for C&C games (while optional, the CKG, like 3e’s ‘Unearthed Arcana’, will be an ‘official’ book for the system).  (You know this fact, John, since I’ve pointed it out to you many times before.   TLG is a small company – it took WotC a few months to get the DMG out after the PHB, so it seems unreasonable to take TLG to task for not having all the rules available yet.)Okay, I don’t understand this at all.  The whole point of the different XP progression charts in C&C is to ‘balance’ the classes, and I don’t understand why you say this method of ‘balancing’ classes is not possible.  Why is it not possible to ‘measure power vs. progression on any kind of meaningful scale?’  A perfectly ‘meaningful scale’ is provided by experience points!According to TLG, there is a ‘system’ for assigning certain experience point requirements for different abilities (BtH progression, class abilities, etc.).  This system will, I think, be presented in CKG, as part of the guidelines for designing custom classes.  (I could be wrong about this, as I do not work for TLG, but this is my understanding.)Really, using different XP progressions to balance classes is not new.  There was a system for the old Basic/Expert D&D game that showed how, by assigning specific experience requirement to different abilities, the various classes were in fact surprisingly well ‘balanced’ (iirc the magic-user was the only one that was not ‘balanced’ – he was much weaker at lower levels relative to other classes).In short, I don’t see why using a system of different experience point requirements as a method to balance different classes is any less valid or viable than the 3e method.  (I can understand why  you might not like this method.  I myself prefer the 3e method.  But that does not mean that it is not a viable system.)Well, this is obviously a vague claim.    <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />I think it is undeniably the case that it is possible to design a FRPG that has the kinds of options you want (at least based on my reading of your posts here at ENworld), but is nonetheless much ‘lighter’ than 3e.See Green Ronin’s ‘True 20’ game for one such example.  See Eden’s ‘Cinematic Uniystem’ games (Buffy and Angel) for another example.  These games are both about as ‘light’ as C&C, but include many options for players (as many as 3e D&D, as far as I can tell).  Heck, even WFRP is much lighter than 3e D&D, while keeping plenty  of flavourful options for players (including tactical combat, etc.).For a campaign that did not have that ‘old school D&D’ flavour, I would use these games, rather than C&C, as a GM.I agree with Turjan:Also, regarding:I think True 20’s magic system has a lot in common with M&M.  In any case, I like its magic system much more than 3e D&D’s magic system.   <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f60e.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":cool:" title="Cool    :cool:"  data-smilie="6"data-shortname=":cool:" /></blockquote>

Verification