Troll Lord Games

Hi Crusaders,

I have thouroughly enjoyed the process of moving my homegame from 4e D&D to C&C over the past 3-4 months, and now that I've run it a while, I've got some questions about some nuances of its system. My experience in fantasy rpg'ing isn't too profound, I owned the several copies of Red Box (Basic D&D) back in the '80's, played but never DM'ed some 2nd edition in high school, and then came back to fantasy gaming in the early 2000's with 3.5, and was involved well enough to switch to 4e when it came out, and have even played some 5e. I started my homegame when some of my wife's co-workers expressed an interest in trying to play "D&D." I pulled my 4e books off the shelf, since I actually had the DMG and MM for that edition, and started throwing goblins at them.

I'm not gonna go into the nuances of 4e (I'm sure many are already familiar, and I am being mocked for having played it), but it quickly became tedious to run, so I started to look for alternatives, and of course found C&C as my solution. Running games is now a cakewalk as far as the game mechanics go (SIEGE engine for the win), which allows me to spend more time on plot and story and cool encounters, which I really appreciate.

One gripe from the players is that the classes don't advance at the same rate, which of course was the case in 4e, so I now have a Paladin that's trailing behind the other PC's in the party (Bard, Rogue, and Assassin-- yes, it's a weird group and now as I write this, I wonder what on earth a Paladin is even doing travelling with these other characters). I'm curious about why this is the case, and would like to hear some arguments for why this is a good thing. Is it just a throwback to 1e AD&D, as I know C&C strives to emulate the feel of the original game? Do you feel that there is a power imbalance between classes that warrents some 'weaker' classes to advance more quickly than 'stronger' classes? I'm no gaming history buff (yet), but have been getting more and more curious about the origins of some of our rules and standards in this genre as I get more involved in gaming. And of course if I or my players get to disgruntled, I can always homerule that everyone advances as fast as the rogue does, or something to that effect. At this point, I'm just curious as to why it is as it is, and maybe hear about how other CK's and players have handled this.

dansteeby wrote:so I now have a Paladin that's trailing behind the other PC's in the party (Bard, Rogue, and Assassin-- yes, it's a weird group and now as I write this, I wonder what on earth a Paladin is even doing travelling with these other characters).

The paladin should be trying to convert the others all the time. I had one player with a paladin that, eventually, convinced the rogue to stop stealing stuff and make reparations.

In theory its because some classes "do more" or have more to learn so they go slower? In general, I find such detail trivial and largely ignore them in detail, but having the thief be one level higher than the others and the wizard one level behind seems to be the way of many games... that said, I don't think it would unbalance if all were the same for simplicity. Think of it as party level advancement.. party is now 5th level.. good job team! Also, what happens below 12th lvl is mathematically very different than at say 19th lvl... take X experience to make say the Cleric 18th lvl and see what level all the other classes end up at.. much different thing,

Simplistic answer on advancement rates is sort of twofold that dovetail together. First is that some classes become quite powerful the high level they become, such as the wizard, as opposed to other classes such as the rogue. This of course is looked at in terms of combat potential. Then you have the second reason which dovetails to the first, some class abilities increase that potential for the particular class in less than a consistent bell curve (for easy reference). So a 5th level wizard can potentially out-damage a like level fighter, cleric, or rogue...and the advancement rate is a form of balance for the PCs in a party so no one character eclipses another. A side reason is that it could represent the greater amount of training and difficulty of accruing skills required of that class if looked at in terms of story line.

Honestly, I find the differing advancement rates more appropriate than a universal rate unless using a skill based rather than level based advancement system.

Yeah, WOTC thought the classes could be balanced and have the same XP progession. As the many, many, many internet conversations attest, there is no way to balance the classes, let alone have it be fair that they all require the same XP to advance. So the clolsest fix is to vary the XP required to advance, the more inehrently powerful classes advance more slowly. Then again, they still have the Cleric and Druid get some of the lowest XP requirements, and my only guess for that is they are not the offensive power houses that Wizards and Illusionists can be. They are Primarily defensive. Plus, as anyone who has played a Paladin knows, having a permanent immunity to Disease, and eventually Fear, are BIG advantages when those threats come up. Plus having a permanent +2 to AC and Saves when fighting anything evil is a big help too. I personally rule that the ability is actually a permanatized Protection from Evil effect (As it pretty much always has been since 1E AD&D), so it also makes it impossible to influence Paladins via Charm abilities. So I can see why they require more XP to advance, but I will agree that their XP requirements are still ridiculously high compared to other Classes. Such as the Cleric and Druid.

Issued IX of Domesday will be putting some stuff out on experience points... so, if you have system, methods Q&A I need submission and thought provoking articles on this very topic.. please consider condensing some of this into a nice write up. I do not care if its is 1/4 page or three pages.