View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Tue Oct 22, 2019 3:59 pm



Reply to topic  [ 37 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Classy Classes 
Author Message
Unkbartig
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 7:00 am
Posts: 947
Post Classy Classes
So after mentioning that I've rarely been entirely happy with the Bard class, even in C&C, on Enworld, I feel a need to atone. After all, it's not like the Bard is a bad class in C&C. It's just been a difficult class, as far as I'm concerned, since inception. I've played Bards in every edition, and will probably play one in C&C as well.

So anyway, what do you think is great about the classes in C&C?

It's a simple thing, but for the Cleric, the weapons-list makes me happy. I hated the whole simple weapons proficiency of 3e, because it meant the Clerics were no longer proficient with warhammers and I never could get behind them using edged weapons. C&C brought the warhammer back into the Cerics' hands, which is where it should be.

Of course, in earlier editions the warhammer was a terrible choice of weapon, so I've little idea why I'm so nostalgic for it. Probably has something to do with my old 14th level cleric....

Also, the return of the Assassin base class was pretty darn cool. It was well-handled, presenting a grey area of morality without being over the top. The Assassin core class was always a great nod to the grim fantasy genre.


Tue Jun 13, 2006 2:42 pm
Profile
Ulthal
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 01, 2006 7:00 am
Posts: 737
Location: St. Paul, MN
Post 
I agree with the assasin, awesome class. I really love that they can use any weapon, whatever they need to get the job done. However I have been puzzled by their inability to pick locks. This means that a 12th level assasin can be foiled by a sturdy door and a deadbolt. I might have to house fule this and slightly adjust the Assasin EPP.

I like the monk as a d12 hit dice, yet without the necessity of a martial artist style concept, you can make the monk a barroom brawler or a wrestler.

The bard as a warrior storyteller rather than an effeminite minstrel/caster is awesome, I really like the C&C bard.

Finally I really love the C&C fighter, unmatched in martial combat by any class (as it should be), a fighter is a formidable character.
_________________
CK the CK
"My goddess touched me at an early age."

-Grikis Valmorgen, Paladin

The beginnings of my homebrew campaign world and info for my play by chat game:
http://kbdekker.googlepages.com/home


Tue Jun 13, 2006 3:14 pm
Profile WWW
Battle Stag
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 7:00 am
Posts: 11558
Location: The fairest view in the park, Ohio.
Post 
The Assassin and Thief (Rougue, whatever) are downright awesome classes in C&C. The thief is unparalleled in level andvancement and combine that with the amount of neat useful abilities they get at 1st level, makes the thief grand. The assassin fills a void left in many of the other editions of D&D. However, the assassin's insta-kill ability is so damn powerful that it rivials being absolutely broken.

The Fighter is great, as mentioned above he is the best figting class in the game. Simple.

The Ranger is cool because he no longer has spells (Whoo hoo!, I always hated Ranger spells. Blech) The abilities they the Ranger receives are very nice, and fit perfectly as such.

The Cleric has been a dissapointement for me and my players as well. Yes, clerics are the only ones who can "heal" but other then turning undead they have no other appeal. There advencement was slowed in C&C to the point that it's almost not worth playing... almost.

The Bard... d10 HP?! Whoa.

The rest of the classes are very nice, and fit well within the game. I think they work well and are as good as the same classes in other versions of the D&D game.

...........................................Omote

FPQ
_________________
> Omote's Advanced C&C stuff <
Duke Omote Landwehr, Holy Order of the FPQ ~ Prince of the Castles & Crusades Society

_________________
@-Duke Omote Landwehr, Holy Order of the FPQ ~ Prince of the Castles & Crusades Society-@
VAE VICTUS!
>> Omote's Advanced C&C stuff <<


Tue Jun 13, 2006 4:11 pm
Profile WWW
Cleric of Zagyg
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 01, 2006 7:00 am
Posts: 10775
Location: Somewhere in Time
Post 
I love the bard class. Either version (AD&D 1E) or C&C. I've been playing a halfling bard in Skathros' C&C chat game on DF, and have minor spell casting abilities. It's worked out very well as we've gained and lost a cleric, illusionist and druid and didn't have any casters until recently.

The bard class is a great one to tinker with, IMO and I've seen several fan versions around the forums that are great.

My other favorites are the assassin, who I've played as a dungeon crawling sharpshooter and the illusionist.
_________________
Count Rhuveinus - Lejendary Keeper of Castle Franqueforte

"Enjoy a 'world' where the fantastic is fact and magic really works!" ~ Gary Gygax

"By the pricking of my thumbs, Something wicked this way comes:" - Macbeth

_________________
Count Rhuveinus - Lejendary Keeper of Castle Franqueforte

"Enjoy a 'world' where the fantastic is fact and magic really works!" ~ Gary Gygax

"By the pricking of my thumbs, Something wicked this way comes:" - Macbeth


Tue Jun 13, 2006 4:27 pm
Profile
Mogrl

Joined: Mon May 01, 2006 7:00 am
Posts: 20660
Location: Arizona and St Louis
Post 
I am happy about a lot of the things already mentioned, but I am happiest about the return of the Illusionist. Specialty classes was something I always hated. You want to be a Necroamncer? Then select the damn spells and be a Necromancer. Never needed some stupid specialist or PrC to be a Necromancer. The spells and creation and control of undead make you a Necromancer!

You want to be a "pure" Necromancer? Then make a pure class along the same lines of the Illusionist!

Can you tell this has bugged me for years?

_________________
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

Grand Knight Commander of the Society.


Tue Jun 13, 2006 5:57 pm
Profile
Hlobane Orc

Joined: Wed May 24, 2006 7:00 am
Posts: 159
Post 
Just like serleran stated the thing I love about the C&C classes are that there aren't too many spell casters. As for an overall feedback...

Fighter: Well designed and fun to play.

Ranger: In my opinion the best C&C class and my second favorite. Very useful. My only quibble is why Strength as his prime?

Rogue: In future prints I would suggest having the class called Thief. Otherwise it's great the way it is as it's not a sneak attack monster.

Assassin: The second best class in C&C and my favorite one. I agree with Combat_Kyle on his inability to pick locks? What happens if he needs to poison the baron in his locked chamber? Anyhow, never "Balance" the class because of its death attack. It works just fine. (Remember that if he fails at the attempt, a fighter will probably hack him to pieces!) Why does everything needs to be balanced anyway? Playing C&C isn't about power gaming, right?

Barbarian: My group didn't try that one yet so I can't comment.

Monk: Great class but I'm wondering what happens at 1.3 level and up? Does his prime attack damage go to 1d12 and at 1d20 upon reaching level 17 etc..?

Wizard: Great class although way too easy to hak & slash in his first 3 levels. Even by a single kobold. But since his spells don't have dice damage limits like in D&D 3+ I guess the class is just fine.

Illusionist: Having his unique abilities along with different arcane spells makes it a very fun class to play.

Cleric: Like it should be.

Druid: I really like this version of the class.

Knight: Its funny that WotC made a knight in D&D3.5's Payer's handbook II after C&C made a very good knight. My third favorite C&C class.

Paladin: My group and I normally don't use this class. It's a useful class, but with the knight around, the paladin doesn't fit very well and besides my players have a hard time identifying with the class.

Bard: He looks allot like a skald, my group and I like it ver much. Again a good class.

Suggestions for future books or supplements...

Classes that would have been fun as core would be the pirate and brigand. In someway a rogue/fighter pretty much fits the pirate and a Rogue/Ranger a Brigand but still those classes are part of many adventures and even my players always ask for those classes. Pirates are good on water ambush while the brigands on land ambush. They can do more than that, but you get the idea.
Oh and a Half-Ogre (A race!) needs to be brought back somewhere.
ZW.


Tue Jun 13, 2006 6:35 pm
Profile
Ulthal
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 01, 2006 7:00 am
Posts: 737
Location: St. Paul, MN
Post 
Quote:
Treebore wrote:
I am happy about a lot of the things already mentioned, but I am happiest about the return of the Illusionist. Specialty classes was something I always hated. You want to be a Necroamncer? Then select the damn spells and be a Necromancer. Never needed some stupid specialist or PrC to be a Necromancer. The spells and creation and control of undead make you a Necromancer!

You want to be a "pure" Necromancer? Then make a pure class along the same lines of the Illusionist!

Can you tell this has bugged me for years?



It has bugged me as well, Im my group compsoed of a wide variety of players, another experienced gamer and I were talking about necromancers and the youngin who had only played 3.5 before asked how we could make a necromancer without a class for it. We stared at him and said it was character concept and speel selection that make necromancers.
_________________
CK the CK
"My goddess touched me at an early age."

-Grikis Valmorgen, Paladin

The beginnings of my homebrew campaign world and info for my play by chat game:
http://kbdekker.googlepages.com/home


Tue Jun 13, 2006 6:36 pm
Profile WWW
Unkbartig
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 7:00 am
Posts: 947
Post 
Simple: Lock-poison.
Quote:
ZeornWarlock wrote:
Assassin: The second best class in C&C and my favorite one. I agree with Combat_Kyle on his inability to pick locks? What happens if he needs to poison the baron in his locked chamber?

ZW.


Tue Jun 13, 2006 8:03 pm
Profile
Red Cap

Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 7:00 am
Posts: 381
Post 
Come in through the window?

ken
_________________
Gygax is to Gaming what Kirby was to comics

Alas poor Elric I was a thousand times more evil than you

Slice N Dice: Game and Pizza Parlour

WWBYD What would Brigham Young do ?
http://www.geocities.com/J_Elric_Smith/Index.html


Tue Jun 13, 2006 8:10 pm
Profile
Maukling
User avatar

Joined: Sat May 27, 2006 7:00 am
Posts: 5284
Location: East Texas
Post 
Quote:
Quote:
However I have been puzzled by their inability to pick locks.



I'd allow an assassin to make attempts to pick locks, just not let him add his level to the attempt (perhaps bump the challenge level up slightly as well). It is not a stretch to think he could do so and it also keeps the thief ahead in this regard (which he should be)


Tue Jun 13, 2006 9:33 pm
Profile
Ulthal

Joined: Mon May 01, 2006 7:00 am
Posts: 496
Post 
[quote="Arioch"]Come in through the window?

ken[/quote]

wait in the hallway, and hit him in the morning
Cheers,

J.


Tue Jun 13, 2006 9:36 pm
Profile
Lore Drake
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 26, 2006 7:00 am
Posts: 1026
Post 
Quote:
ZeornWarlock wrote:
What happens if he needs to poison the baron in his locked chamber?

ZW.



Dress up like the chamber maid.
Brian Miller

"Dang she's hairy one. Must be part dwarven."
_________________
"The adventure continues"

_________________
Promoting C&C at Gary Con and LGGC since 2005.


Tue Jun 13, 2006 10:49 pm
Profile
Lore Drake

Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 7:00 am
Posts: 1523
Post 
My favorite class in C&C is the Monk, finally a monk that is tough enough to jump into combat and display all that fancy hand to hand combat.

I also like the fact that the Fighter is the best fighter (silly as that sounds ) but he is all around the best toe to toe guy as he should be.

The Ranger is also done better (IMHO) than any other version of rangers I have seen.
_________________
Never throw rocks at a man with a Vorpal Sword!


Tue Jun 13, 2006 11:04 pm
Profile
Maukling
User avatar

Joined: Sat May 27, 2006 7:00 am
Posts: 5284
Location: East Texas
Post 
I think the C&C Rangers and Monks both are nice makes on the classes.

Also, for some reason the druid keeps catching my imagination, and in the past it was always a class I never really thought to much of.


Tue Jun 13, 2006 11:17 pm
Profile
Hlobane Orc

Joined: Wed May 24, 2006 7:00 am
Posts: 159
Post 
lol @ at most of you. But poisoning the doorknob would simply dispatch the ones outside the room.
What other non-spell casting class would you guys and girls like to see?

ZW.


Tue Jun 13, 2006 11:57 pm
Profile
Lore Drake

Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 7:00 am
Posts: 1523
Post 
I also like the Paladin, and his set of abilities. Clerics, Knights, Druids, Wizards, and Rogues(which I like better than thief ), are all solid classes at least as good as any counterparts in any version of D&D.

The Bard is also interesting and has a nice ability package, its hard to get my players to like this one, however as the 2E bard was very popular in our games.

It sounds like I may be in the minority here, but I would have been fine without the assassian and to a lesser extent the illusionist. Not that they are not done well in C&C, but as classes in general I just never had much use for either.
_________________
Never throw rocks at a man with a Vorpal Sword!


Wed Jun 14, 2006 12:13 am
Profile
Maukling
User avatar

Joined: Sat May 27, 2006 7:00 am
Posts: 5284
Location: East Texas
Post 
Quote:
ZeornWarlock wrote:
What other non-spell casting class would you guys and girls like to see?



Me personally, I don't want to see any more. One of the things that veered me away from 3.5 was the whole:

"I want to be class #11 from add-on book #23"

There's more than enough variety for me with current class/race mixutres.


Wed Jun 14, 2006 12:17 am
Profile
Hlobane Orc

Joined: Wed May 24, 2006 7:00 am
Posts: 159
Post 
Quote:
DangerDwarf wrote:
Me personally, I don't want to see any more. One of the things that veered me away from 3.5 was the whole:

"I want to be class #11 from add-on book #23"

There's more than enough variety for me with current class/race mixutres.



I agree you that I don't want dozens of rules books. But in the first AD&D edition there was that Unearthed Arcana book, which introduced a few more classes and sub-races. I imagine "one" book of that sort would be fine with us C&C players. Especially if they add serleran stuff in it.
ZW.


Wed Jun 14, 2006 2:27 am
Profile
Clang lives!
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 01, 2006 7:00 am
Posts: 7125
Location: Conneaut Lake, PA
Post 
I think that all the classes are exceptionally well done and all have some (albeit minor) improvement over earlier editions, especially the Ranger, Bard, and Paladin.

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


Wed Jun 14, 2006 2:41 am
Profile
Red Cap

Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 7:00 am
Posts: 381
Post 
I like all the classes plus a few others We have created for us in our home games

ken
_________________
Gygax is to Gaming what Kirby was to comics

Alas poor Elric I was a thousand times more evil than you

Slice N Dice: Game and Pizza Parlour

WWBYD What would Brigham Young do ?
http://www.geocities.com/J_Elric_Smith/Index.html


Wed Jun 14, 2006 8:43 am
Profile
Red Cap

Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 7:00 am
Posts: 224
Post 
I always loved illusionist characters, and I'm happy they've returned to C&C as a separate class with unique abilities. I always hated the 'specialist' system in both 2nd Edition and 3rd. Sorry Maliki!
I like the treatment of all of the classes in C&C -- the barbarian being the only exception... though I'm happy with it now thanks to some of my own houserules and a couple of good ideas by some of you folks.

I would love to see a seperate necromancer class with its own spell list as well.. since the system is about archetypes I think would be an appropriate addition to the game along with some sort of dex-based finesse fighter (swashbuckler).
_________________
----------------

Moorcrys


Wed Jun 14, 2006 1:11 pm
Profile
Red Cap

Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 7:00 am
Posts: 381
Post 
that is true especially since cleric tend to make better necromancers then Wizards,have to get out the note book and start putting things to the computer.

Alas why is it I can be as creative as heck when writing in my little note books but staring at a black screen on the computer seems to drain it all away

ken
_________________
Gygax is to Gaming what Kirby was to comics

Alas poor Elric I was a thousand times more evil than you

Slice N Dice: Game and Pizza Parlour

WWBYD What would Brigham Young do ?
http://www.geocities.com/J_Elric_Smith/Index.html


Wed Jun 14, 2006 1:15 pm
Profile
Unkbartig
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 7:00 am
Posts: 947
Post 
I know the feeling; I still write all my campaign and gaming stuff up on spiral bound notebooks and in manila folders. I may email notes to myself, but that's about it.

Quote:
Arioch wrote:
Alas why is it I can be as creative as heck when writing in my little note books but staring at a black screen on the computer seems to drain it all away

ken


Wed Jun 14, 2006 2:18 pm
Profile
Red Cap

Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 7:00 am
Posts: 381
Post 
Gld to see I am not the only one

ken
_________________
Gygax is to Gaming what Kirby was to comics

Alas poor Elric I was a thousand times more evil than you

Slice N Dice: Game and Pizza Parlour

WWBYD What would Brigham Young do ?
http://www.geocities.com/J_Elric_Smith/Index.html


Wed Jun 14, 2006 2:20 pm
Profile
Lore Drake
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 26, 2006 7:00 am
Posts: 1026
Post 
Quote:
Jyrdan Fairblade wrote:
I know the feeling; I still write all my campaign and gaming stuff up on spiral bound notebooks and in manila folders. I may email notes to myself, but that's about it.



Alot of times, I just wing an adventure for a group and then, afterwards, go type out whatever went well. For me, good role playing by the players helps stoke my imagination...In that aspect, my kids are a real godsend (as are the likes of the people who played in my adventures at the convention).

Take last night when I was CKing for my kids for example,

Leave it to a kid to have their character get in a debate with a skeleton over who's fatter...aruging that the skeleton is 'bigger boned'...and then, while it's distracted, instead of attacking, my daughter's character writes 'This side up' on the back of the skeleton's skull...and draws me a picture to show me what it looks like.
From now on, I'm puting graphitti on all my skeletons.

Brian Miller

"The kids always go for the laughs."
_________________
"The adventure continues"

_________________
Promoting C&C at Gary Con and LGGC since 2005.


Wed Jun 14, 2006 7:51 pm
Profile
Unkbartig
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 7:00 am
Posts: 850
Post 
I like some of the subtle differences. Such as the illusionist's tendency to have some nice spells that ignore SR.

In some respects, an assasin is an urban ranger who stalks and kills two-legged prey. Things like that.


Tue Jul 04, 2006 1:51 am
Profile
Hlobane Orc

Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2006 7:00 am
Posts: 174
Post 
My books arrived yesterday and I've finally had a chance to read them (very briefly). I have a few comments (questions?) about some of the classes.

Fighter: It says that they are the best in melee bar none, but the ranger gets to add his level in damage if he's attacking humanoids and giants. Eh? Surely this puts the fighter in the shade most of the time?

Barbarian: Don't particularly like this as a concept (nothing to do with C&C) so might ban it anyway.

Bard: Very nice, but doesn't have any minor casting ability. Might add some (and I know others have done the same), but it would have to be very minor as they have d10 now! Or make it less minor(?) and downgrade to a d8.

I have one concern but it is purely from a player's perspective. Apart from the roleplaying style, and the equipment gained over time, I can't see any way for one player playing one class from being substantially different to another player playing the same class. Now I don't want all the stuff that 3.5e has added, but something for the players to choose over time.

Maybe Non-Weapon Proficiencies? Talents? Hmm.


Thu Jul 20, 2006 8:19 am
Profile
Mogrl

Joined: Mon May 01, 2006 7:00 am
Posts: 20660
Location: Arizona and St Louis
Post 
I think your right if they also chose the same Primes, otherwise there will be very noticeable differences when they do Prime versus non-Prime saves and checks.

As for the fighter versus Ranger, we had that discussion to. Yes, the ranger does shine when fighting humanoids (BTW, I strongly, no STRONGLY recommend you go to your M&T and reclassify your humanoid humans, elves, dwarves, etc... to, crap! Whatever it was they were classifed in 2E, unless you want your Rangers getting their bonus against them as well.) Overall, it was the concensus that Fighters do outshine the Ranger in most fights and as they go up in levels.

As for the Bard, do what makes you happy, and I think cncplayer.net has some of those ideas your remembering for the Bards. Personally I think it is cool the way it is, as well as the no spells ranger and no spells Paladin. Their powers are cool enough.

_________________
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

Grand Knight Commander of the Society.


Thu Jul 20, 2006 9:08 am
Profile
Red Cap

Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 7:00 am
Posts: 224
Post 
Hi babbage,

You may wish to scale a fighter's combat dominance ability to affect higher hit-die monsters as they gain levels, or give them something equivalent to a Cleave feat in 3.5 (there is a thread or two about both lurking around somewhere). But as Treebore said, most people seem to feel as though fighters work out rather nicely in play.

I like bards, and if you restrict class access to things such as wands and staves in your campaign perhaps you could allow bards to use those sorts of items (perhaps if they succeed at making a Charisma check with a -10 penalty or some similar mechanic) in addition to their decipher script ability. A C&C bard is a good fighter with plenty of hit points and some nice abilities that benefit a party, but I also like the idea of them pulling out a wand or similar magic item and attempting to coax the magic out of it. This would give them some additional magical options while still keeping the C&C theme of limiting spellcasting to a few classes intact.

Your question about differentiating characters of the same class is a valid one, as C&C is based on the 'old school' flavors of D&D, particularly 1st edition. If you're interested in secondary skills, Castle Zagyg: Yggsburgh written by Gary Gygax has an optional secondary skill system for C&C you may like, as well as rules for multiclassing and dual classing characters. C&C is intentionally bare-bones in this regard so that you may add what you wish to the game without fear of getting tangled up in a slew of mechanics questions. There are a number of people who have added feats to their C&C games as well to help differentiate between same-classed characters.
_________________
----------------

Moorcrys


Thu Jul 20, 2006 1:54 pm
Profile
Ulthal
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 01, 2006 7:00 am
Posts: 737
Location: St. Paul, MN
Post 
Well as far as telling the difference between characters fo the same class, its simple: role playing. I have had 2 fighters, 2 rogues, 2 wizards and 2 barbarians in my campaign and each one differed vastly in thier mannerisms, comabt style and attitude. Yes they had the same abilities, but each of them has some different primes and such. For instance one of the fighters is a elf fighter with a Dex prime, he uses bows alot and is much different from the human fighter with Con and Int primes. But C&C is very modular and do what you want with it.
_________________
CK the CK
"My goddess touched me at an early age."

-Grikis Valmorgen, Paladin

The beginnings of my homebrew campaign world and info for my play by chat game:
http://kbdekker.googlepages.com/home


Thu Jul 20, 2006 4:20 pm
Profile WWW
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 37 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware for PTF.