Troll Lord Games

I've taken a good look at csperkins' epic offering and it looks pretty neat. I was just wondering if anyone out there has played it and what they found, if they did.

I've looked it over but my way of playing involves me creating things that lay outside of existing D&D material. I find I use more module material than rules material, unless it is something I wrote, and then only for a session or three and it gets discarded as boring. I suck.

serleran speaks true.

I'm playing in Treebore's online game and we're using these rules. I don't care for them at all. Too much detail and variation from both C&C and AD&D. It's my opinion that I'd prefer to play one or the other, not a combined system.

That said, Treebore does a fantastic job of running the game due to his extensive knowledge of both systems and as such - the game runs smooth with only the occasion pause to compare/examine spells from the 2 systems.

I play it!

I've been running a game with my wife and a few friends for the last few months. So far, so good.

Sorry that you don't dig the rules Rhuvein, I tried to strike a balance between AD&D and C&C that worked for the guys I game with. Different strokes for different folks I guess.

When I run the game, I don't use any C&C materials except Monsters & Treasure... and that's only when I'm too lazy to convert AD&D beasties beforehand or on-the-fly. Having a few hardcopies of my PHB on hand makes life much easier for my players and me.

csperkins1970 wrote:I play it!

I've been running a game with my wife and a few friends for the last few months. So far, so good.

Sorry that you don't dig the rules Rhuvein, I tried to strike a balance between AD&D and C&C that worked for the guys I game with. Different strokes for different folks I guess.

When I run the game, I don't use any C&C materials except Monsters & Treasure... and that's only when I'm too lazy to convert AD&D beasties beforehand or on-the-fly. Having a few hardcopies of my PHB on hand makes life much easier for my players and me.

That was the other question I had, actually ... whether Monsters & Treasure could be used with it as was. I don't really have access to AD&D stuff directly, nor do I particularly want to play AD&D as is, but the old-school feel of your hybrid looks interesting.

Oops, sorry Chris. I don't mean to say I don't like the rules. They are very well thought out and well written for the most part.

Perhaps I should have clarified my thought . . what you've done is excellent for peeps who know AD&D.

Me, I'm only a student of that game and like to play it but wouldn't run it without dropping so much of the tables and rules that it would end up being BD&D.

So, let me say that what you've done is a great balance of the 2 systems for those who might know them both and like to utilize stuff from both.

Simpletons, like me prefer C&C or BD&D.

Also, my prospective comes from mostly online gaming, where I like it simple, so if I were to play the AD&D 3rd edition in a tabletop game, I could see enjoying it better.

Having them printed out makes it much easier on me, that is for sure. I can't learn a game from PDF's worth a darn.

KaiserKris wrote: That was the other question I had, actually ... whether Monsters & Treasure could be used with it as was. I don't really have access to AD&D stuff directly, nor do I particularly want to play AD&D as is, but the old-school feel of your hybrid looks interesting.

Yep. The only difference that you need to keep in mind is that you should double the Move rates listed in M&T if you play with my rules.

Rhuvein wrote:Oops, sorry Chris. I don't mean to say I don't like the rules. They are very well thought out and well written for the most part.

Not a problem. I get where you are coming from, even though my preference leans towards AD&D emulation using C&C as a base.

Maybe, once I've finished with my version of UA (which will now incorporate the best bits from the DMG and UA) I'll work on a basic form of my rules. As I play it, I see bits that I'd like to pare down or eliminate completely.

I play in the same game as Rhu and while I like the rules, they are a tad bit on the complex side of things for. Not that they are complex, but compared to btb C&C, they are. Still, having fun with them.

R-

I also play in the Treebore game. One of the main reasons we wanted to try these rules is it offered some more class choices, which I liked (although as Treebore pointed out, then I went and played a wizard-druid who happens to be a reincarnated bear [long story ] so I did not try any of the new classes anyway)

Mixing the AD&D and C&C feel works reasonably well, I find. We do have to look up some things as we go. Most of us are of the "wing it" school of play anyway.

A few things did not seem balanced quite right. One I noticed was the psionicist, which is one of my favourite classes. I was thinking of playing one, but Treebore and I both thought the way powers worked could be a bit unbalanced. Although I should note we never played it, so I don't know how it works in real play

Some of the spells seem to have changed in ways that make them more or less powerful than C&C equivalents in noticeable ways so we have had a few surprises along the way

This is amplified somewhat by the fact we are running through a great set of 1st ed modules (presently finishing the Gauntlet and then heading for the slavelords) which list things in AD&D 1e terms. So we have to grapple them into C&C terms, and then into AD&D 3e terms

All in all, the rules are an interesting switch and we are definitely having fun with the campaign

I haven't read it all the way through yet, but I like most of it so far. If C&C didn't exist, I'd probably play this. Heck, if it was available in hardback I'd buy it.

KaiserKris wrote:I've taken a good look at csperkins' epic offering and it looks pretty neat. I was just wondering if anyone out there has played it and what they found, if they did.

Linky?

Aramis wrote: A few things did not seem balanced quite right. One I noticed was the psionicist, which is one of my favourite classes. I was thinking of playing one, but Treebore and I both thought the way powers worked could be a bit unbalanced. Although I should note we never played it, so I don't know how it works in real play

I'd probably not allow a psionicist in my game either!

I may eliminate the class from the final version (which I'm still working on), since I was never a fan of psionics. Still, if you have any suggestions for balancing the class I'd love to hear them. Psionics were ALWAYS unbalanced in AD&D, so I used the 3rd edition sorcerer/psionicist as my baseline for this class. There are limitations to the powers (many alteration spells and all healing spells are "self" only) and all powers fail if the psionicist is knocked out. Also magic resistance has some effect against psionics... which should help level the playing field a bit at higher levels.

Glad you're having fun with it. I'm glad that Treebore found them viable enough to use in a game he runs (seriously). He plays lots of different RPGs, so I consider him an RPG aficionado.

joela wrote:

KaiserKris wrote:I've taken a good look at csperkins' epic offering and it looks pretty neat. I was just wondering if anyone out there has played it and what they found, if they did.

Linky?

Here you go

Look in the AD&D3 section and you'll find it.

csperkins1970 wrote:

joela wrote:

KaiserKris wrote:I've taken a good look at csperkins' epic offering and it looks pretty neat. I was just wondering if anyone out there has played it and what they found, if they did.

Linky?

Here you go

Look in the AD&D3 section and you'll find it.

Thanks, csperkins1970!

csperkins1970 wrote: Psionics were ALWAYS unbalanced in AD&D, so I used the 3rd edition sorcerer/psionicist as my baseline for this class. There are limitations to the powers (many alteration spells and all healing spells are "self" only) and all powers fail if the psionicist is knocked out.

Truthfully, perhaps the easiest way to design "psionics" for DnD is to pick a variant of the 3rd edition sorcerer and use a themed spell list e.g. telepathy, domination, illusions etc.
To further add flavor:

• Have a PR (Psionic Resistance) for monsters that's at different levels than Spell Resistance. (Some monsters are more susceptible and others aren't.
• Rename Dispel/Read Magic into Disrupt/Decipher Psionics and have it only work on other Psionic effects
• Focus on "psionic" (Magic) items that store spells or spell levels.

Thus you get something with an exotic feel, but with proven mechanics. In fact, with the CnC's new Illusionist healing spells, you could have a Psionist Class replace the Wizard and Cleric classes for either a cross genre (the Deryni anyone?) game or a CnC scifi game.

I can vouch that for NPC villians, this has worked pretty well. For cannon fodder, I just add the right spell or two and increase the XP amount as per MnT.

csperkins1970 wrote:

Aramis wrote: A few things did not seem balanced quite right. One I noticed was the psionicist, which is one of my favourite classes. I was thinking of playing one, but Treebore and I both thought the way powers worked could be a bit unbalanced. Although I should note we never played it, so I don't know how it works in real play

I'd probably not allow a psionicist in my game either!

I may eliminate the class from the final version (which I'm still working on), since I was never a fan of psionics. Still, if you have any suggestions for balancing the class I'd love to hear them. Psionics were ALWAYS unbalanced in AD&D, so I used the 3rd edition sorcerer/psionicist as my baseline for this class. There are limitations to the powers (many alteration spells and all healing spells are "self" only) and all powers fail if the psionicist is knocked out. Also magic resistance has some effect against psionics... which should help level the playing field a bit at higher levels.

Glad you're having fun with it. I'm glad that Treebore found them viable enough to use in a game he runs (seriously). He plays lots of different RPGs, so I consider him an RPG aficionado.

Good points CS. I think your system has got so many good little house rules mixed in, something is bound to be useful to just about anyone.

Now, as to psionics, let me bore you with a few of my thoughts. No edition has ever really got it quite right for me (although 2nd ed came closest). 1st edition made it an add-on to a character which had the potential to really unbalance the game vis a vis other characters. 3rd edition made it essentially a variant wizard with fireball equivalents etc. In 2nd edition, the system was wonky, but the flavour make-up of the character was about right.

My personal preference is for psionics to be different than wizardly magic in terms of effects, but probably using the same system. Psionics should be primarily focused on effects on one's own mind, body, and the minds of others. It should not affect the external world very much. Thus, I am dropping the idea of pyrokinesis etc. type powers (although a bit of vanilla telekinesis is fine)

One class that 3e got right was the psychic warrior. That is one of the few fighter types that really interests me.The psychic warrior, for those who do not know, was a fighter with self buffing powers that he can adjust, and turn on and off, unlike more straightforward fighter types whose powers were either always on, or applied only in certain cases. Having the ability to "pull levers" and "spin dials" on your fighter to set him up for each fight was a very interesting system. I would much rather use a psychic warrior class, for example, in place of the monk, which never fit for me on the basis of flavour, nor in terms of place in the party (not resilient enough to be a front liner, but can't scout or cast spells either)


Returning to the original question of potential imbalance in your system, primarily it is a function of adopting the points sytem instead of X spells per level. Points give players a powerful new decision to make. They can chart a moderate course on days where that works best, but on days where opponents are mostly low level types, they can do a "shallow but broad strategy" of many many low power effects. Similarly, on days where the foes are few but powerful, the psionicist can "go nova" and cannibalize all his low level points to make just a few really potent effects. This is magnified by the fact that psionicists don't ever memorize the wrong spell, as they spend their points as the problems of the day occur, which in itself is a fairly potent upgrade from wizard.


Let me try to construct an example (no guarantee of accuracy is provided for what follows ). A 4 th level psionicist with 17 CHA would have 16 points. Thus he could do 16 1st level "spells" in a day. Or, he could do 2 charm persons, 2 sleeps, 4 Cure light wounds, and 4 hold persons (8 1st level and 4 2nd level). By contrast a 4th level wizard with INT bonus gets 4 1st and 3 2nd.

At 10th level the issue becomes more obvious. The wizard gets (ignoring 0 level spells-includes INT bonus) 6/5/4/3/2 = 50 spell levels (I think) . The 10th level psionicist has 75 points and can use up to a 5th level power. So he can choose to do 75 Charm person or 36 Hold persons on the days that is required, or, on other days he might just feel like using dimension door 3 times and fireball 15 times. That would be a very amusing day

Your system partially compensates for this by delaying wizard equivalent spells to the psionicist until later levels, and only allowing a limited list of powers (to which the psionicist cannot easily add, unlike the wizard who just needs a spellbook or scroll). But I still think it would work better if:

a) you dropped points entirely. Psionicists get powers exactly like spells. So 4x 1st and 3x 2nd at 4th level (but like sorcerors, they need not memorize ahead of time).

b) you change the powers list and remove things like fireball, lightning bolt, silence, etc. Add in more psionic oriented powers from other sources. I noticed an interesting list of sources for psionics recently at dragonsfoot

c) you could break the class into 2 parts (this is more my thing than what you should do). The psychic warrior (like a monk) and the psionicist (like a mind wizard). Or, keep it a broad tent and the player can emphasise one end of the spectrum or the other in his power choices.

Anyway, those are my muddled thoughts. Keep up the good work

Aramis wrote:Your system partially compensates for this by delaying wizard equivalent spells to the psionicist until later levels, and only allowing a limited list of powers (to which the psionicist cannot easily add, unlike the wizard who just needs a spellbook or scroll). But I still think it would work better if:
a) you dropped points entirely. Psionicists get powers exactly like spells. So 4x 1st and 3x 2nd at 4th level (but like sorcerors, they need not memorize ahead of time).
b) you change the powers list and remove things like fireball, lightning bolt, silence, etc. Add in more psionic oriented powers from other sources. I noticed an interesting list of sources for psionics recently at dragonsfoot
c) you could break the class into 2 parts (this is more my thing than what you should do). The psychic warrior (like a monk) and the psionicist (like a mind wizard). Or, keep it a broad tent and the player can emphasise one end of the spectrum or the other in his power choices.
Anyway, those are my muddled thoughts. Keep up the good work

I think the best bet would be to cut power list a bit to give it more of a "mentalist" feel... like you suggest above (b). That way they don't tread on the toes of magic-users and have their own niche. I'll work on that once I get home from visiting family this week. Once I do, I'll post the updated UA (still incomplete... but with the revised powers and recent additions I've made) and give a heads up here.

I love both AD&D and C&C, so this certainly intrigued me. I haven't actually run it live, but it reads nice! And the overall AD&D look is very well done. Thumbs up!

PHB errata update:

I fixed a grammatical error in charm person (I used "him" in place of "he").

I've added the spell crystalbrittle from the original Unearthed Arcana.

Right now I'm plugging away on my version of Unearthed Arcana.