A problem with two players

[old school gamer]

Ok here it is,

Some time ago I got a little tired of D&D 3E. I didn't neccessarily hate the game but after playing it for years I got weary of all the feats, Prestige Classes and technical combat rules. Now I have been running Champions for years and still like the system above nearly everything else. But sometimes the game can get rather heavy rules wise and after GMing a long running Champions game, (to give you an idea how long the PC's started at 250 pts and are now all over 400), and wanted a break.

Then one day I was looking over reviews at RPG.net and I came across a game called Castles and Crusades in fact here is the review: http://www.rpg.net/reviews/archive/11/11008.phtml

So I went to my local FLGS, Dragon Lair and picked up a copy of the Players Handbook. I found myself really liking it. It was a simple system that was easy to run and easy to play. So I started running it, starting out the with Rising Knight adventure that I got free off Troll Lords website and then running a campaign using one of my wife's worlds.

So for awhile things were good. My group liked it and one player in particular named Bryan really liked the game and has pretty decided that it is the only game he is interested in getting involved with. He pretty much doesn't have alot of personal time to learn anything else and he finds Hero System to be too complication. This was OK, because everyone else was find with what we were doing.

However I have hit a snag. One player that has been away for training in the Army Reserve has recently returned to the fold. This guy named David is a good player for the most part and is pretty consistent in arriving for a game. However he is a self-confessed power-gamer and hates Castles and Crusades, stating that he can't customize his character. This guy has a ton of D&D books and has no regard for older versions of games.

Well as it is I have put my C&C game on hold and have started running Pulp Hero, sans Bryan. The thing is this Sunday I am going to have off and I want my players to come and game with us at my house. We tried playing D&D 3E again last week but once again I find myself disliking all the book flipping and such and really missing C&C. I want both players to come over mainly because we are short two players that are away for the holidays.

So what do you suggest I do? Do I just tell one to stay home and the other to come over or do I try to find a compromise? Have either of you guys ever have a problem like this?

[Dagger]

I would find out what part of character creation in 3.5 makes him feel like he is customizing his character and then add it into C&C. Feats can be brought over basically "as is". There are a few that relate to attacks of opportunity, etc... that are not applicable. If he wants to use skills, let him pick them from 3.5 and put them on his character sheet. You can still use the SIEGE engine when he uses those skills... maybe just give him a +1 for each skill rank or something.

C&C is built to be customizable, so it's easy to add those things without bringing the rest of the complications over from d20. I really think that may be the way to handle it. You still have the simplicity of C&C while giving the players the character building options they want.
_________________
Rusty

[Matthew]

When it comes down to it, the most important preference is really your own. If you don't enjoy 3e or D20, why should you suffer to please a player who doesn't enjoy C&C? I can think of a few possible reasons, but none of them particularly convincing to me. Of course, when play style preferences clash within a group, either compromises have to be made or the group disbanded, depending on the exact circumstances; so, you might consider doing as Dagger4192 suggests and modify the game. Alternatively, perhaps this player or somebody else would be willing to run D20, taking the burden off you?
_________________
It is a joyful thing indeed to hold intimate converse with a man after ones own heart, chatting without reserve about things of interest or the fleeting topics of the world; but such, alas, are few and far between.

Yoshida Kenko (1283-1350)

[gideon_thorne]

old school gamer wrote:
However I have hit a snag. One player that has been away for training in the Army Reserve has recently returned to the fold. This guy named David is a good player for the most part and is pretty consistent in arriving for a game. However he is a self-confessed power-gamer and hates Castles and Crusades, stating that he can't customize his character. This guy has a ton of D&D books and has no regard for older versions of games.

I suggest pulling in the Weapons Mastery Rules from the Mentzer sets and using the Yggsburgh background skills. If thats not enough 'customization', I don't know whats going to satisfy the person concerned.
_________________
"We'll go out through the kitchen!" Tanis Half-Elven

Peter Bradley

[Harry Joy]

Matthew wrote:
...Alternatively, perhaps this player or somebody else would be willing to run D20, taking the burden off you?

Dead on. When a game is in the planning stages, some groups can get away with some sort of gamer democracy. But ultimately, it's the DMs call what game to run. If the player doesn't like C&C, let him run something.

And it sounds like you guys are old friends, but that is one hell of a kind of asshattery, coming in late and trying to change the system in the middle of a well established game.

Edit: And it sounds like there is only a problem with ONE player, not a couple.

[Rigon]

dagger4192 wrote:
I would find out what part of character creation in 3.5 makes him feel like he is customizing his character and then add it into C&C. Feats can be brought over basically "as is". There are a few that relate to attacks of opportunity, etc... that are not applicable. If he wants to use skills, let him pick them from 3.5 and put them on his character sheet. You can still use the SIEGE engine when he uses those skills... maybe just give him a +1 for each skill rank or something.

C&C is built to be customizable, so it's easy to add those things without bringing the rest of the complications over from d20. I really think that may be the way to handle it. You still have the simplicity of C&C while giving the players the character building options they want.

A sound suggestion.

R-
_________________
Rigon o' the Lakelands, Baron of The Castles & Crusades Society
The Book of the Mind

[moriarty777]

It's never quite easy dealing with such a situation like this. I'll give two examples:

A few years ago, for a variety of reasons, some friends in a local gaming group decided to try something different and turned to me to put them through something. Now these gamers were solid 3.5 gamers but since that wasn't quite my style, I decided to introduce them to WEG's Star Wars. A game which, if you haven't played it, is very fast-paced and is founded upon a simple system. Needless to say, it collapsed after 3 sessions because about half the players were missing that 'crunch' they were used to.

A year and a half ago, I introduced to one of these guys C&C. He was the usual DM and was getting burnt out on running a 3.5 game. After giving it a good read through and asking me loads of questions, he switched. The gaming group consisted pretty much of the same players from the previous example and two players didn't take the change well. He lost those two players for a time but they ultimately came back. Why? Perhaps it was because it became clear was that it was the person running the game that did all the work for it and using a system that was easier to work with when doing so was more important.

Once all the players got used to playing C&C and with a different mindset, they had a lot of fun (knowing it may be difficult for some). One compromise they settled on was that the system they used was dictated by the person running the game. If a player didn't like a system and wanted something different, they were invited to step up behind the screen and run a game themselves. Maybe that's something that you can try.

M
_________________
"You face Death itself in the form of... 1d4 Tarrasques!"

Partner to Brave Halfling Publishing
http://www.arcanacreations.com

[AGNKim]

So everyone liked it, even having one guy say it was the only game he wanted to play. Then ONE guy comes in and hates it. Seems pretty easy to me. Side with the 'everyone' and have Mr. "I Can't Have Fun Unless My Character Is Uber" go find some 3.0, uh 3.5, uh 4.0 players.

It always pisses me off when someone barrels in and wants to change stuff to suit him. Screw that.

[slimykuotoan]

I'm afraid there's no cure for Munchkinism.

If he is afflicted with this malady, then I suspect he enjoys character options purely because he can create invincible characters who can't ever die, and are able to beat everything thrown at them, etc.

Unfortunately, these people tend to play for the thrill of winning, and not for roleplaying.

Force him to try one game without compromising anything to see what happens first.

Unfortunately, it's possible you may need to drop this player if you want to play C&C.

[moriarty777]

slimykuotoan wrote:
I'm afraid there's no cure for Munchkinism.

If he is afflicted with this malady, then I suspect he enjoys character options purely because he can create invincible characters who can't ever die, and are able to beat everything thrown at them, etc.

Unfortunately, these people tend to play for the thrill of winning, and not for roleplaying.

Force him to try one game without compromising anything, to see what happens first.

Unfortunately, it's possible you made need to drop this player if you want to play C&C.

I disagree... it isn't a malady... it's an addiction!
Seriously though, I've seen many a power gamer in AD&D too but it tends to take a different form and can be a bit more controlled (by the DM).

The suggestion is a good one, but the player will still end up going into the game with the notion that he's not going to like it. That's a very difficult hurdle to beat.

M
_________________
"You face Death itself in the form of... 1d4 Tarrasques!"

Partner to Brave Halfling Publishing
http://www.arcanacreations.com

[Valerian]

I have also ran into the same dilema as you speak of this year. I was running a 3.5 game for many years and grew tired of the heavy rules burden. I got rid of attacks of opp. , stat items , maxed stat spells at 18. Then the announcment for 4th ed. pushed me to far. I started running a C&C/AD&D campaign again . One player was a power gamer and couldn't take the change so left . He hasn't come back as he found a monty hall 3.5 game through a mutual aquaintance now hes happy . Each to thier own . Now my wifes younger brothers who learned and grew up with 3.0/3.5 are seeing how much more adventure they get done with a rules light system . That they asked for 1st editionstuff for christmas. After some heinous ebay showdowns I bought them every 1st edition hardcover they were estatic. Ultimatily as DM I must enjoy what I am running or I lose my flavor the game.
_________________
What is best in life-

To crush the PC's

See their character sheets piled before you

And to hear the lamentations of the players

-Conan the dungeonmaster

[Treebore]

I say run the game you and the majority of your players will be happy with, long term. IF this is a "one shot" deal than run what everyone can "deal with".

The Goodman Games CK screen can also help a lot with "book flipping" if you can get it at your LGS.

You can also consider adding in my "feat rules", which aren't really feats per se, unless I end up awarding them as PC "mastery's". I'll post them later when I am on my comp with the rules saved to them. Its pretty intuitive and still SIEGE based.
_________________
The Ruby Lord, Earl of the Society

Next Con I am attending: http://www.neoncon.com/

My House Rules: http://www.freeyabb.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... llordgames

[Maliki]

I have a small list of feats that I carried over from 3E, these are toned down, but still help players tweak thier characters a bit. If this doesn't help and if only the one player doesn't like C&C I'd let him know that is what your are running, he is welcome to sit down and give it a try or he can find another group. I see no reason to reason to ruin everyone elses fun for the sake of one person.
_________________
Never throw rocks at a man with a Vorpal Sword!

[Traveller]

While Robin's Laws of Gamemastering cover what to do with people like this, the solution is really a no-brainer. Play what the majority likes, and if this power-gamer can't deal with it, f*** him. Invite him to leave.
_________________
NOTE TO ALL: If you don't like something I've said, PM me and tell me to my face, then give me a chance to set things right before you call a moderator.
My small homage to E.G.G.

[CharlieRock]

moriarty777 wrote:
Seriously though, I've seen many a power gamer in AD&D too but it tends to take a different form and can be a bit more controlled (by the DM).

The powergamer is the same guy (I think). It's just in D&D3 he thought that somehow he could hide the fact from the DM.

See, in AD&D you could see the guy right away by what kind of item he had. Like, the Hackmaster +12. (That's why I thought that joke was funny)

Now, in D&D3.x you have to scour over pages of character sheet like some kind of accountant auditing the mafia. How many plustas are hidden behind seemingly innocent sounding feats?

Anyway, we all know several cures for munchkinism. It is just a matter of personal preferance.
_________________
The Rock says ...

Know your roll!

[gideon_thorne]

"What? You have what feat? Lets see ya roll to stop one of my feet from kicking ya off the plank!" *punt!*
_________________
"We'll go out through the kitchen!" Tanis Half-Elven

Peter Bradley

[Treebore]

To help you see how I have integrated feats I had to give you a lot of my house rules document.

But as you see, I have them earn their feats. Until then they must roll SIEGE checks to attempt anything FEAT like.

CLASSES:

Fighters:

They get to use their BtH to make combat related SIEGE checks, plus their specialization bonuses when using that weapon. All other classes use just their BtH.

Fighters can also learn to master (specialize) a new weapon every 3 levels. So at 4th, 7th, 10th, and so on they can master a new weapon. They only get the +1 to hit and damage. These additional weapons never increase to +2 like your first weapon does. Unless you use one of your additional "mastery's" to do so. So if you want to be +2 with the bow, you can use your 4th and 7th level mastery to do so,

Clerics:

Clerics can do SIEGE checks similiar to Wizards.

Clerics can spontaneously convert spells to damage healing spells (IE restore HP's)

Clerics get to add their level to damage healing spells, which increases the amount healed up to the maximum. For example Cure Light cast by a 5th level Cleric rolls 1d8+5 up to a maximum of 8, not 13.

Clerics and Paladins may make SIEGE checks with the CL equal to your level (why does it get more difficult? Because your deity typically doesn't like to help you when your one of his more powerful servants. You should stand on your own two feet with the spells he gives you.) to use Turn Undead energy to bolster your attacks for one round per 3 levels of your character. In this case the SIEGE check is much like casting a spell, so takes the same time as a spell casting action. For every point you succeed it will add one point to your attack then damage bonus, maxing out when the bonus equals your character level divided by 3.

Example: Say your character is 9th level. They do a SIEGE check at CL 9 so need to beat a 21, this check is treated as Prime. Say a nat 20 is rolled for a total of 30. That succeeds by 9, so 9 points with which to build your bonus. You can only use six points to max out at +3 to hit and +3 to damage.

Knights: To clarify knightly combat prowess that is not adequately discussed in the PH, Knights do NOT suffer a -2 penalty to attack from horse back with a melee weapon, nor do they suffer a -4 to hit with missile weapons. Plus a Knight and his mount are both able to attack in the same round. All things no other class can do, or do without penalties Plus they can also do everything listed in their description in the PH, including getting a x3 multiplier on lance attacks when mounted on horse back and charging..

Rangers:

Get to choose an enemy at 6th level and every level thereafter. IT must be pretty specific, such as Ogres, Frost Giants, Vampires, Worshippers of the "Forest Burners", etc... This allows you to add your bonus to all SIEGE checks against them, including attack maneuvers, AND add your level to the Damage if they didn't qualify for your marauder before. CK approval, of course.

Druids:

They can go one of two paths, animal or elemental. Either path gains the ability to become a Treant at 9th level. At 6th level you choose which path you will follow. Animal can choose animal forms to chang into. Elementalists choose one fo the 4 elementals, earth, air, fire, and water. One form at 6th, 7th, 8th, and 9th you get the Treant form.

Your HD and HP will be the same in your animal and elemental form. In animal/elemental form your BtH will equal your HD, and you gain the movement and special defenses of the animal/elemental form you have. Your damage and attacks are the same as the Animal/Elemental form as well.

At 12th level you can assume each chosen form 2/day. It becomes 3/day at 18th.

Paladins:

When they gain the Smite Evil ability they can use it once per day per level. OR they can choose to have "religious enemy" under the same rules as the Ranger's "enemy". Then choose a new one every two levels, like the Ranger does. They can only do one or the other, not both Smite and Religious Enemy.

Assassins and Thieves:

Your BtH progresses as lvl - 2, so your BtH is 0 at first and second level, but increases by one every level thereafter.

Assassins can make a SIEGE check to do their death attack in one round. The check is TN 12 + level/HD of the target.

Wizards:

SIEGE checks can be used to alter spells being cast. A SIEGE check can be made to change the energy type of a spell. For example, to change a fireball to a electric ball, ice ball, etc... you make a TN 12 check + your level to beat a CL = to the level of the spell. So to change the fireball to ice would be a CL 3, so beat TN 15.

Similiar checks can be done to maximize damage, CL spell level +3

To double range, CL spell level +3

To increase number of targets effected, CL spell level +3 per additional target (example spell, Charm Person to effect two people instead of one)

Failure, in all cases, loses you the spell. Roll a natural 1 and pray for survival if it causes damage.

For Bran's games: Wizards are "sorcerors, and can use Illusionist spells as well, and they "know" all spells automatically, and are limited to casting the "spells per day". Yeah, its broken as hell, but he is still young.

RUNEMARKS:

Are a rune based wizard. Plus everything class related is based off of their Wisdom, not intelligence.

Why? Because rune magic is literally based on word fragments of the "Words of Creation". So rune magic, and the fragments of the words of power used, are the ultimate source of all powers, divine and arcane. So they are treated as Divine, but might be able to use arcane items. Arcane item use is explained later.

Advantages: You only need to have your rune in hand to cast the spell and be able to speak the word of power associated with that spell. So all spells are verbal and material only, with the only material being the spell specific runestone.

So Runemarks can be tied up, but as long as they have the runestone in their hands, and can speak, they can cast the spell. If they do a successful SIEGE check CL=spell level +4 they can cast the spell by will alone. The runestone is still required to be in hand. So even gagged they can still cast a spell if the SIEGE check is successful. Wizards can do this, but to do it bound and gagged would be a CL=spell level +8 to do so.

Runestones are made out of expensive materials, but are reuseable. Runestones cost 25 GP for first level, 35 GP for second level, 50 GP for third level, and 100 GP for levels 4 to 6, then 50 GP per level for levels 7 to 9 (350 GP to 450 GP per spell), with certain price exceptions for spells like Wish, etc... Those costs will be double of what is in the PH, but the runestone is not consumed.

Biggest drawback: Unlike a mage losing a spellbook, if you lose your runestones you can't cast another spell until you make new runestones for the spells you know/have memorized.

Plus Runemark's cannot use Wizard or Illusionist magic items easily. They must make a SIEGE check versus TN 12 + level the item is made at to use it successfully. If they fail the SIEGE check they can never use that particular item until later. If they succeed they can use that particular item, or item power, from then on. Scrolls can never be used in this manner. Potions can be freely used like any other class. Fail the SIEGE check and they can never use that particular item, or item power, until they make another level to get another SIEGE check to try and figure it out.

Rune magic items:

Runemarks cannot cast arcane or divine classed scrolls, nor do they make scrolls. Runesticks are made in place of scrolls, but for all intents and purposes works just like a scroll. Costs of a runestick are twice that of normal scrolls, but otherwise is the same in terms of time to make them.

They use rods, staves, and wands (very similiar looking to runesticks), but they are all rune based, so called Rune Rods, Rune Staves, and Rune Wands. They can also make potions, but the container is used to empower the fluid inside, so rune potion containers are typically bigger than normal potion vials because of this.

Runemark Skills: Runemarks are very good at engraving and carving, as well as identifying metals and gemstones, since they are so crucial to the basics of making runestones and rune items. All checks, when related to runecasting and making rune items, are WIS based. Otherwise it will be related to DEX, or whatever stat the CK considers relevant.

SIEGE Checks:

As you probably guessed, I allow SIEGE checks to be used for a lot of things other than skills. They can be used by fighters to try and get extra attacks, to get an extra attack when you take an opponent down, to transfer points from your BtH to your damage roll, if you think of it, ask me if you can do it. If you have played 3E many of their feats are good ideas for SIEGE checks.

IMPORTANT: If you successfully use a SIEGE check frequently enough to perform a specific kind of action I will eventually, when I decide to do so, award it as a "signature move". This will mean that as long as your opponent is no more than 3 levels higher than you, or lower, you will not need to perform a SIEGE check to do the "signature move". You can have as many "signature moves" as I decide to award you with.

SKILLS:

Not only do you have any skills specified in the class description, and treat all such skills as if you have a Prime in the related stat for purposes using that skill, you can create a list of 10 more skills for your character to have beyond those specified for your class. You can also add one more skill per point of INT bonus.

Clerics and Druids can use their WIS bonus instead, if it is higher than their INT, for purposes of extra skills.

LANGUAGES:

If you take a race other than human you automatically get the listed bonus languages. Humans can have common and an additional language per point of INT bonus. If they want more than that they can burn one of the 10 base skill slots to do so. However, languages do not use up INT bonus points for purposes of skills. So if you have an INT of 18, you get 3 languages as well as 3 additional skill points. This is the same for non-humans. IE an 18 INT gets them 3 more languages of their choice, as well as gives them 3 more skill points.
_________________
The Ruby Lord, Earl of the Society

Next Con I am attending: http://www.neoncon.com/

My House Rules: http://www.freeyabb.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... llordgames

[Harry Joy]

I've had all day to think about this, and yep, I'm still flat out astounded by the balls on this fellow. He has no business dictating what game you guys run, are running and having fun playing. No way, no how, no matter who he thinks he is.

[Catweazle]

I'm forced to agree with Harry. I'm even tempted to think that Bryan is being treated rather unfairly.

Consider the position as you have set it:

You ran D&D, and came to dislike it, so changed to C&C. The rest of the group came along with you, and one of them became a downright convert to the game.

Now David comes along, hates C&C, and to accomodate him you choose to inconvenience the whole group and start running a third system. Now Bryan is now no longer a part of the regular group, despite having become extremely fond of the game system you instituted in the first place.

Now, it's evident that David is more highly valued as a member of your group, given how you have done your best to accomodate his demands, and the fact you draw attention to his reliability and qualities as a good player. Now you want them both to come along, although again primarily it seems that the reason for this is that there are other people missing from the usual lineup for your game, and you want the numbers made up. Given that both David and Bryan have mutually-exclusive tastes, you have to decide which one you want to please the most. From what you've written, that would appear to be David, despite your own loathing for 3.5.

In Bryan's position, I would feel that I'm being used as a convenience, only called upon when nobody else is available, and my own wishes ignored. In fact, in Bryan's position I would already be looking for a new group or starting my own.

I don't think you're being very honest with anyone in your group at this moment in time, primarily because you're trying to please everyone. That is very rarely possible. For your own peace of mind, pick the system or systems you like to run the best, advertise that fact openly and honestly with everyone, and run that game until that campaign, gaming season or whatever is concluded. Then you all know where you stand, and nobody will be tempted to try to force your hand, either.
_________________
History teaches us that men behave wisely once they've exhausted all other alternatives.

[simontmn]

If you want to powergame via character 'build' in C&C, your best bet is to play a Wizard and min/max on spell selection. Any flying-invisible-fireballing Wizard is a kind of powergaming.

[Harry Joy]

simontmn wrote:
Any flying-invisible-fireballing Wizard is a kind of powergaming.

So, would playing a high STR Human Fighter wielding a Great Axe and wearing full plate be powergaming? Halfling Rogue who sneak attacks from hiding - Powergaming? Cleric in full plate with high STR bashing things with a mace then healing everyone - Powergaming?

[gideon_thorne]

Harry Joy wrote:
Cleric in full plate with high STR bashing things with a mace then healing everyone - Powergaming?

Only when casting Harm instead of healing spells through the mace.
_________________
"We'll go out through the kitchen!" Tanis Half-Elven

Peter Bradley

[simontmn]

Harry Joy wrote:
So, would playing a high STR Human Fighter wielding a Great Axe and wearing full plate be powergaming? Halfling Rogue who sneak attacks from hiding - Powergaming? Cleric in full plate with high STR bashing things with a mace then healing everyone - Powergaming?

1. Fighter - yes, he's optimising. Except that he should use a Bearded Axe for 3d4 damage.
2. Not really. If he's dual-wielding the best weapons to do so, then yes.

3. Yes, if mace is the best available weapon.

I'm using the term in the non-pejorative sense of making a character as powerful as possible, which to some extent is necessary in a Gamist game like C&C. But as your examples show, non-spellcasters have a limited opportunity to do this in C&C.