Tank wrote:
I had that same stumbling block. I like how in C&C, I already know all the rules!
Me too! I cracked the book open and it was like it all made sense and I already knew how to play. It didn't seem like it took me like 20-30 mins to read through what I needed to.
Greg Ellis wrote:
Spend some time looking over Lejendary Adventure, since you bought it and all.
Most of this multi-classing, complicated-skill-system nonsense just melts away...
No offense, but I see people struggle with this stuff in all the class-based systems. If you're so into skills, why not play a skill-based system for a change.
I play L5R.
_________________
The Ruby Lord, Earl of the Society
Since its 20,000 I suggest "Captain Nemo" as his title. Beyond the obvious connection, he is one who sails on his own terms and ignores those he doesn't agree with...confident in his journey and goals.
Sounds obvious to me! -Gm Michael
Yeah, the differences between LA and other D&D-like games are mostly in the terminologies, but Gary wanted it that way. It takes a little bit to rethink the "words" but the play is similar, once you get used to it. Oh, and Gary's "roll as few dice as possible" thing, despite having some funky random results of like 13 - 37. That can take some getting used to, even in AD&D!
serleran wrote:
Yeah, the differences between LA and other D&D-like games are mostly in the terminologies
I think it's a mistake to think of it that way, actually.
LA is very different from the D&D-like games. It's basic mode of operation is different. Characters are defined in a completely different way. Success and failure in any particular endeavour is evaluated in a different way. There are no levels. There are no classes. There are no Str/Dex/Con/Int/Wis/Cha-type stats.
Yes, you're still psuedo-medieval folks wandering around in a world full of nasty creatures and weird monsters, but that's where the similarity ends.
Trying to cram it into the D&D mold, and understand it in those terms, just leads to grief. I know, I've done it.
LA defines characters (called Avatars, or Avatar Characters, or just "Characters" if you prefer) using broad and general areas of competence called Abilities.
An Avatar's score in an ability represents a basic percentage chance for success in some endeavor related to that ability. Those changes can be modified by circumstances of course, at the Lejend Master's discretion (+/- 30% is about the limit of these adjustments, usually).
For example, here's a beginning Avatar (thanks Zorathman, hope you don't mind...):
==
Orc, Lesser
Health: 74
Precision: 50
Speed: 9.5
AEPs: 38
Knacks: Instinctive Rider, Relaxation
Quirks: Poor Vision
ABILITIES:
Stealing: 40
Urbane: 35
Weapons: 32
Physique: 29
Enchantment: 19
Nomadic: 10
Enchantment Powers :
Dazzling Dart - moderate
Whirlwind - v. minimal
Read Power - v. strong
Private Illumination - minimal
Phantom Self - v. minimal
==
So by default, this character has a 40% chance of succeeding at any sort of activity that has to do with stealing, 35% chance of success at some Urbane pursuit (something to do with understand how the city-life works, finding a fence maybe, or locating a corrupt official), 32% chance to hit with a weapon, 29% chance at any feat of strength, 19% chance to successfully activate an enchantment ("cast a spell" if you like) and a 10% chance to succeed at some task related to the Nomadic lifestyle (hunting on the plains, tracking a caravan, whatever).
LA play tends to incorporate quite a lot of the non-combat elements of the adventure. It's not that the combat system isn't a good one (it is), but rather that the other aspects of the character are so well-defined and easily accessible that they pop up more often than they would in a D&D-style game.
The other thing you will notice is that the abilities are very broad in scope, and there are very few rules that limit how they can be used. For instance, with this Avatar, Stealing Ability is at a fairly decent level. Anything you can imagine that has something to do with stealing can be attempted. State your plan, the Lejend Master will work out what sort of modifier to apply (or likely none at all) and you roll the dice.
As an Avatar adventures, he earns Merits (kinda like XP) and spends them to increase his scores in any of his base stats (Health, Precision or Speed) or any of his abilities, however he wishes. So, for instance, if the player decides that Enchantment is fun, but 19% is kinda limiting, he might decide to spend merits to raise that stat all the way up to 80%, 100% or even more than that, as time goes by.
Avatars tend to gain a few additional abilities as they go along, too. It's not uncommon to have as many as ten.
Almost all of the weapons available inflict up to 20 Harm, which is enough to kill a regular man. Some are 1-20, while others have a higher minimum, like 2-20 or 4-20 or 6-20 or even 11-20.
There's no "AC that reduces hit probability" idea in LA. In fact, most attacks hit. A strong fighter-type will have a Weapons score of 65% or so (at least).
Instead, armor blocks Harm. For example, an Avatar wearing 6 points of armor can subtract the first 6 points of Harm from most of the attacks coming at him. That 6 points accrues to the armor, instead of to the Avatar himself. Various pieces of armour have different totals, but it's fairly common to see armor that can accumulate something like 40-200 total points of Harm before it falls apart.
Magic is accomplished using a spell point system (Activation Energy Points, or "AEP"). These re-accumulate in the Avatar at a fairly rapid rate, so frequent casting is not an issue, as long as the magic is fairly low-powered.
Activations range in power all the way up to the "Extreme". The top-end activations are capable of producing quite awesome effects, but they take a lot of time and energy, which makes them (usually) unsuitable for typical combat encounters. If you know the battle is coming, and you've still got lots of prep time, though, look out. Even a beginning Avatar can do some pretty awesome stuff with activations, if the circumstances are right.
Thanks for the awesome summary! I'm planning on picking up the 2nd edition when it is released so I can play on Gary's porch at next year's LGGC (assuming I can get on the list!). Unfortunately, I don't have a group to play, but if I can get some people sucked into C&C, maybe I can throw in some LA now and again.
tylermo wrote:Your efforts are greatly appreciated, Buttmonkey. Can't believe I said that with a straight face.
That *is* informative... and very useful things to keep in mind before I plunge into read the LA stuff in greater detail.
Now... I know that trying to compare LA and C&C (or d20 for that matter) may be like trying to compare apples and oranges. That being said, I'm still going to try!
I've think I read somewhere (in a previous thread) that a beginning avatar character in LA was about the rough equivalent to a level 4-5 character. Taking that one step further would it be fair to say that for every 5% in a given skill, that this would be the equivalent to a skill level in C&C?
(I know I'm probably over simplifying things but what can do eh?)
Thanks,
Moriarty the Red
_________________
"You face Death itself in the form of... 1d4 Tarrasques!"
That is a great explanation, Greg. They should put that as a print out in all future boxed sets that get sold.
_________________
The Ruby Lord, Earl of the Society
Since its 20,000 I suggest "Captain Nemo" as his title. Beyond the obvious connection, he is one who sails on his own terms and ignores those he doesn't agree with...confident in his journey and goals.
Sounds obvious to me! -Gm Michael
moriarty777 wrote:
I've think I read somewhere (in a previous thread) that a beginning avatar character in LA was about the rough equivalent to a level 4-5 character.
Sure, as a rough approximation, I guess.
Quote:
Taking that one step further would it be fair to say that for every 5% in a given skill, that this would be the equivalent to a skill level in C&C?
No, I wouldn't say that at all.
Ability scores are the base % chance to succeed in that area of endeavour.
E.g. if you have 85% in Physique, you will succeed in feats of strength 85% of the time.
There's no correspondence to "levels" in that idea. What level fighter do you need to be to succeed in feats of strength 85% of the time? There's no answer to that question.
What level of magic user do you need to be to successfully cast a spell 65% of the time? There's no answer to that one either. The magic system is far too different to make the correlation.
For example, in LA, any Mage can try to cast the most powerful activation in the game, assuming he knows it. You don't need to gain levels to get access to bigger and better spells. If you wanted to, you could choose the most powerful activations in the game right from the very beginning of your career (during character creation). D&D is different, you have to work your way up.
But yes, you could approximate the general capabilities of a beginning Avatar as being close to a mid-level AD&D (or C&C) character. I'd say around level 5-7. But that's just a gross approximate, intending to warn you that the beginning Avatars are quite capable of handling themselves. They're not going to have to run away from wild dogs or a couple of orcs the way that 1st level 4 hp mages and thieves might.
Ability scores are the base % chance to succeed in that area of endeavour.
E.g. if you have 85% in Physique, you will succeed in feats of strength 85% of the time.
There's no correspondence to "levels" in that idea. What level fighter do you need to be to succeed in feats of strength 85% of the time? There's no answer to that question.
Hmm... ok then, let me (stubbornly) attack this from a different angle...
A bit earlier in the thread, you mentioned that checks may be modified by the Lejend Master by up to '+' or '-' 30% (typicially). How could this possibly be translated as a Challenge Level in C&C? Is 30% is considered 'Heroic' in terms of difficulty (in the sense of making the check harder) in the sense that a such a Challenge Level in C&C would be 15-20+ ?
I know this isn't an easy question to answer... it may not even really be possible to answer either due to the way that both systems differ so very much. I guess I'm just looking for a quick and dirty way for converting certain adventures into LA (or vice-versa).
Regardless, LA looks pretty cool and I can't wait to play with it a bit.
Thanks,
Moriarty the Red
_________________
"You face Death itself in the form of... 1d4 Tarrasques!"
Actually Greg, not to contradict, but Gary has noted to me a few times that 5% does equate pretty readily to a +1 in a levels based game. Beginning level characters in LA, I was further informed, are about the equivalent of 5th level characters. ^_^
_________________
"We'll go out through the kitchen!" Tanis Half-Elven
Peter Bradley
"The accumulated filth of all their sex and murder will foam up about their waists and all the whores and politicians will look up and shout, 'Save us!' And I'll look down, and whisper 'No.' " ~Rorschach
And, there is a way to determine the "what level does a PC need to be to cast spell X" but it would require adding in a few elements to both game systems. Thus is the sacrifice when going from a classless/level-less system to a class-based, level-based game. It doesn't mean they are not similar... it just means they have different mechanics to get to the same result. Kind of like eating a blueberry pie instead of a hamburger; both will fill you up (maybe), but they taste different.
Then again, I think every RPG is similar. So, my opinion doesn't count.
gideon_thorne wrote:
Actually Greg, not to contradict, but Gary has noted to me a few times that 5% does equate pretty readily to a +1 in a levels based game. Beginning level characters in LA, I was further informed, are about the equivalent of 5th level characters. ^_^
Well obviously 5% is equal to +1 on a d20, right?
But we're not talking about a "+1", we're talking about "+1 level", and that's kinda different.
Sure, level 5 is about right, I guess. Or 6, or 7. They're all about the same. But like I said before, it can only be interpreted as a gross approximation of the general level of "ability to take care of themselves". There's nothing further to learn from that comparison.
LA doesn't work like D&D, so you can't make generalizations like "+5% on your highest ability is like gaining a level".
Gaining a level in D&D gives you added hp, access to more powerful spells, a better chance to hit, better saving throws, access to new abilities sometimes, added weapon proficiencies, etc.
In LA, you don't gain levels. You can decide for yourself whether you would like to spend your merits on extra Health, or on your Enchantment ability, or to improve your skill with weapons, or increase your Speed, etc. Whatever you want to do. You can pile all of your improvements into one area, or spread them around however you like. I think most folks concentrate on whatever areas have been giving them grief lately.
To extend the analogy a bit, if a starting Avatar is like a 5th level D&D character, then an experienced Avatar is like a 5th level D&D character who has become considerably more capable in a few specific areas, and picked up a couple of extra skills along the way. He will almost never become "like a 15th level character". LA isn't an upward spiral like that. The game doesn't work that way.
serleran wrote:
And, there is a way to determine the "what level does a PC need to be to cast spell X" but it would require adding in a few elements to both game systems.
Ah... but that's not the question I asked.
It was "What level of magic user do you need to be to successfully cast a spell 65% of the time?"
And there is no (meaningful) answer to that, because the question doesn't make sense with the D&D ruleset.
Greg Ellis wrote:
It was "What level of magic user do you need to be to successfully cast a spell 65% of the time?"
13... at least the way I run magic...
_________________
"We'll go out through the kitchen!" Tanis Half-Elven
Peter Bradley
"The accumulated filth of all their sex and murder will foam up about their waists and all the whores and politicians will look up and shout, 'Save us!' And I'll look down, and whisper 'No.' " ~Rorschach
Greg Ellis wrote:
Well obviously 5% is equal to +1 on a d20, right?
But we're not talking about a "+1", we're talking about "+1 level", and that's kinda different.
Hey... wait a sec... I did say 'skill level' not just level!
Since there are not 'skills' in C&C as such... a class skill goes up by 1 per level. Of course, that still doesn't take in consideration Primes and Attribute Mods. It's still apples and oranges and as far as I'm concerned D&D 3.x is a cucumber!
Thanks again!
M
_________________
"You face Death itself in the form of... 1d4 Tarrasques!"
For some of the newer members here or for any peeps new to LA or interested, I would like to mention that Greg Ellis is the author of the highly acclaimed LA module released by TLG called Fish for Breakfast.
A great way to get started playing Lejendary Adventures.
Wow! What an awesomely cool explanation! Great job Greg! I think they should print that out and print it in later printings of LA!
I havea couple questions. First of all....during my lunch break at work today I went to my local brick and mortar rpg store and bought a few goodies. I bought a Paizo Critical Hit deck to use with C&C, the C&C Monsters & Treasures book (first printing) and, Castle Zagyg Vol 1: Yggsburgh.
I heard there is a coming second printing of Monsters & Treasures. Was I mistaken to have bought a 1st. printing? I read I think that the second printing is only going to contain some errata changes and grammatical corrections. Is that true? I would have ordered it through the Troll Lords but I read that they are still sending out 1st. printings of it too until they sell out and then they will start shipping the second printing ones.
Also, I was lucky enough to pick up Lejendary Adventure Essentials at Origins for only $5!!!! What is missing from the essentials boxed set vs. the full version? I didn't know when I bought this boxed set that it was a condensed version of the game.
The M&T 2 will be $5.00 higher in price and have the errata and new poison tables in it. So if you get the errata download, and buy the Miasmal Worms product you'll have everything thats in the new M&T available to you. Or buy the PH 3rD printing for the poison tables.
Something like that.
_________________
The Ruby Lord, Earl of the Society
Since its 20,000 I suggest "Captain Nemo" as his title. Beyond the obvious connection, he is one who sails on his own terms and ignores those he doesn't agree with...confident in his journey and goals.
Sounds obvious to me! -Gm Michael
Quote:
It was "What level of magic user do you need to be to successfully cast a spell 65% of the time?"
Heh, well, I left out part of what I was going to say.... so, I'll say it now. There is a way to tell what level a caster needs to be to cast Spell X 65% of the time, but it would require adding things to both games to do it... for one, it would be spell level for LA, and for C&C, a mechanical requirement to be able to cast spells in the first place.
daddystabz wrote:
Wow! What an awesomely cool explanation! Great job Greg! I think they should print that out and print it in later printings of LA!
I havea couple questions. First of all....during my lunch break at work today I went to my local brick and mortar rpg store and bought a few goodies. I bought a Paizo Critical Hit deck to use with C&C, the C&C Monsters & Treasures book (first printing) and, Castl Zagyg Vol 1: Yggsburgh.
I heard there is a coming second printing of Monsters & Treasures. Was I mistaken to have bought a 1st. printing? I read I think that the second printing is only going to contain some errata changes and grammatical corrections. Is that true? I would have ordered it through the Troll Lords but I read that they are still sending out 1st. printings of it too until they sell out and then they will start shipping the second printing ones.
Also, I was lucky enough to pick up Lejendary Adventure Essentials at Origins for only $5!!!! What is missing from the essentials boxed set vs. the full version? I didn't know when I bought this boxed set that it was a condensed version of the game.
Well, first off, please let us know how you like the critical hit deck -- I've been curious about it and I've been considering it.
Secondly, the decision to pick up the 1st printing of the M&T won't cause any major problems... it is just errata changes and stuff. Just download the errata and you're good to go!
As for the Essentials box set... great score! Since I was no where near Origins, I will remain happy at the $15 I paid for it earlier today! You'll be happy to know that it really isn't a condensed version. From what I understand, the only difference is that Lejendary Adventures was previously published by someone else in a different format. With TLG publishing LA, they went with a box set which contained all you needed to play (rulebook, monster book, dice, etc) which I figure was a way to make the stuff more accessible. I'm sure more people in the know will fill in the blanks or correct me if I'm mistaken...
TLG has since also produced another book... 'Living the Lejend' which is a companion to the box set. So in other words, you definitely didn't get 'shorted' with the box set! A monsters hardback is also in the works...
Moriarty the Red
_________________
"You face Death itself in the form of... 1d4 Tarrasques!"
Miasmal Wyrms. I just finished reading it and it is a great product (even though my xp chart in the back is messed up [all the even lines are blacked out]).
R-
_________________
Rigon o' the Lakelands, Baron of The Castles & Crusades Society
The Book of the Mind
Castles & Crusades: What 3rd Edition AD&D should have been.
TLG Forum Moderator House Rules & Whatnots My Game Threads
Monday Night Online Group Member since 2007
I am really liking the Critical Hit deck so far. It gives some really neat effects for when a player scores a critical hit and there are even rules for how a GM can use them against players (but monsters have a harder time doing so).
Each card differentiates what kind of damage is in question as to what effect you get. For example, it shows bludgeoning, slashing, piercing and, magic and for each one you get a different effect on each card.
Rigon wrote:
Miasmal Wyrms. I just finished reading it and it is a great product (even though my xp chart in the back is messed up [all the even lines are blacked out]).
R-
hehehe... You're not the only one with a 'funky chart'
M
_________________
"You face Death itself in the form of... 1d4 Tarrasques!"
daddystabz wrote:
I am really liking the Critical Hit deck so far. It gives some really neat effects for when a player scores a critical heat and there are even rules for how a GM can use them against players (but monsters have a harder time doing so).
Each card differentiates what kind of damage is in question as to what effect you get. For example, it shows bludgeoning, slashing, piercing and, magic and for each one you get a different effect on each card.
Cool... and being a deck... shuffling and pulling one out when a crit occurs would be quick and er... um... well maybe not painless!
M
_________________
"You face Death itself in the form of... 1d4 Tarrasques!"
That can take some getting used to, even in AD&D!
Thus is the sacrifice when going from a classless/level-less system to a class-based, level-based game. It doesn't mean they are not similar... it just means they have different mechanics to get to the same result. Kind of like eating a blueberry pie instead of a hamburger; both will fill you up (maybe), but they taste different.
