New to Castles & Crusades: Need SIEGE Help

[Hrothgar Rannulfr]

Howdy!

This is my first post, here.

I've played BECMI, AD&D, and 3.0 and 3.5. And, I'm strongly considering playing Castles & Crusades over DnD4e because our group is looking for a much simpler system. The complexity of 3.0 & 3.5 and the number of things that we feel we need to house-rule is driving us away from 3.5 back toward something akin to AD&D.

I've downloaded the quickstart rules from drivethrurpg and am considering getting the full-fledged Player's Handbook.

The major point that I don't understand about C&C SIEGE mechanics is this:

I don't understand why any other class couldn't attempt most of the Rogue's abilities without being a Rogue. To me, it looks like the SIEGE checks would be the same for both a Rogue and a non-Rogue.

Do characters of specific classes get a bonus on SIEGE checks to class specific abilities that other characters do not? If so, I cannot find it in the Quickstart Rules.

Thanks!!!

[moriarty777]

Welcome to the Crusade!

Well, I'll give you two answers (both short and quick). You can either:

A) Disallow certain class skills to be attempted by other classes (such as a rogue's Pick Pockets for example)

B) Allow it but keep in mind that only the class the skill belongs to gets to add their level bonus to the check. In other words, a third level thief will get a +3 to the check due to their level where as a fighter of the same level would not.

The full PHB does cover this and recommends AGAINST a character to attempt an ability belonging to another class. Naturally, it does continue to say that this is ultimately up to the CK (gamemaster) running the game.

I use option B myself and have had no problems with it.

M

EDIT - I should also add, if you were considering the full PHB in PDF format, you can get it at $10 but this price is likely to change back up to the regular price in the next few days. In other words, now is a good time to grab it! Alternatively, take advantage of the TLG sale where you can get an actual copy of the PHB and M&T for $10 a piece! Also likely to end in the next couple of days.

And no... I'm not getting commission on this -- just looking out for my fellow gamer!

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

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

[Dagger]

Mechanically, the key difference is the Rogue adds their class level to the SIEGE roll where other character classes would not.

The game also doesn't attempt to codify every little thing into a rule, so you'll find that it is similar to older versions of D&D/AD&D where the referee must make judgement calls during play. Ever play 1st edition and have a player ask why a Fighter can't hide?

For instance, a Fighter may wish to "hide in shadows" to ambush some approaching orcs. I would not allow him to do anything approaching the ability of a Rogue. So, as long as he had a good enough place to hide where I wouldn't require a roll anyway** (large crate, wagon, etc...) then I would allow him to be successful.

Otherwise, if the Fighter was attempting to hide in the shadows of a dark alley and blend into the woodwork so to speak, I would consider that in the province of the Rogue and would not allow it to be successful. Perhaps I would allow him to roll a SIEGE check without his level added if I felt it was warranted.

** In general, the math that the SIEGE Engine is based on assumes you are only calling for SIEGE checks when there is a significant chance for failure. Having a character roll for no-brainer tasks that anyone should be able to do is not advised (climbing a tree, hiding behind a large object, making a campfire, etc...).
_________________
Rusty

[gideon_thorne]

Hrothgar Rannulfr wrote:
Howdy!

This is my first post, here.

I've played BECMI, AD&D, and 3.0 and 3.5. And, I'm strongly considering playing Castles & Crusades over DnD4e because our group is looking for a much simpler system. The complexity of 3.0 & 3.5 and the number of things that we feel we need to house-rule is driving us away from 3.5 back toward something akin to AD&D.

I've downloaded the quickstart rules from drivethrurpg and am considering getting the full-fledged Player's Handbook.

The major point that I don't understand about C&C SIEGE mechanics is this:

I don't understand why any other class couldn't attempt most of the Rogue's abilities without being a Rogue. To me, it looks like the SIEGE checks would be the same for both a Rogue and a non-Rogue.

Do characters of specific classes get a bonus on SIEGE checks to class specific abilities that other characters do not? If so, I cannot find it in the Quickstart Rules.

Thanks!!!

A member of a given class adds their level to a siege check when it comes to a class ability. Other classes don't if its not part of their class ability.
_________________
"We'll go out through the kitchen!" Tanis Half-Elven

Peter Bradley

[Aqua Vitae]

Hrothgar Rannulfr wrote:
And, I'm strongly considering playing Castles & Crusades over DnD4e because our group is looking for a much simpler system. The complexity of 3.0 & 3.5 and the number of things that we feel we need to house-rule is driving us away from 3.5 back toward something akin to AD&D.

My reasoning exactly. While I did enjoy D&D 3.5 very much, the 4th edition of D&D has left me somewhat nauseated. I've only obtained the "Condensed" C&C rules, but based on that, numerous reviews, and a burning nostalgia for AD&D 1E...well...here I am!

Hrothgar Rannulfr wrote:
I don't understand why any other class couldn't attempt most of the Rogue's abilities without being a Rogue. To me, it looks like the SIEGE checks would be the same for both a Rogue and a non-Rogue.

Good luck with this. I have my own approach to this problem, in part a class system all my own. I am going to have several generic skills (such as "Evade" and "Stalk") that rogues will get bonuses for but which few other classes will. That way, an attribute check still governs it, but rogues have additional bonuses from their class, whereas knights, warriors, etc. would not. They'd only have their attribute bonus.

[Foxroe]

Welcome to the crusade Hrothgar!

The only limit to using the SIEGE mechanic is your imagination and the ruling of the CK. As has been pointed out already, adding class level for class-related checks is a big bonus, and separates that character from others attempting to use the same ability.

-Fox

[Hrothgar Rannulfr]

Thanks, everyone!

You've all provided a great help!

[Treebore]

If you want to see how to adapt the "feat concept" to the "SIEGE concept" I'll be happy to share my house rules with you.
_________________
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

[Hrothgar Rannulfr]

Yes, thank you, Treebore!

I'd definitely be interested in learning how to convert the feat concept to the SIEGE concept.

[gideon_thorne]

Hrothgar Rannulfr wrote:
Yes, thank you, Treebore!

I'd definitely be interested in learning how to convert the feat concept to the SIEGE concept.

Here's a simple example:

Where a character could accomplish a fixed number of actions in 3e or 4e due to abilities written down on a sheet, C&C can do the same thing with far more scope with just a bit of imaginative description from a player.

For example. I recall that a feat like 'power attack' allows some extra damage by taking a penalty to hit. Why does this require a locked in stone feat? I figure, anyone who's willing to pay the price ought to have the ability. Naturally, its going to work better for fighters due to their better attack rolls. Just one example. There are many others. ^_^
_________________
"We'll go out through the kitchen!" Tanis Half-Elven

Peter Bradley

[serleran]

Welcome.

I hope you learn to abandon the "feat concept" altogether. It serves no purpose but to restrain you, and your players, imagination.

Use the SIEGE Engine as it was intended -- stop thinking with a d20 mind.

But, that's much easier to type than it is to do... so, until you can do such, just think of it this way:

If a player wants to do something that is not a class ability, you decide how hard it is to do, and what attribute would be most relevant. They make a SIEGE Check using that attribute against the difficulty, with you deciding if that particular character gets level or not, based on their previous roleplaying and character concept (and other factors as desired.) After X number of successes (perhaps the difficulty doubled, for example) they either get the ability permanently (no check needed anymore) or can do so at a reduced difficulty or whatever else - I do caution against this as it is very easily abused (and other reasons such as discouraging archetypes.) But, it is your game -- play however you want.

[Hrothgar Rannulfr]

Thanks, Gideon_thorne. That does make sense (concerning Power Attack). Malhavoc has a stunt in the Book of Iron Might that is similar requiring no feat. It was a two for one trade (which I'm assuming was there to justify the feat's existence in the first place).

Serleran, those are good ideas, too. I'm going to get the PDF of the Castles and Crusades Player's Handbook, this evening, and spend some time looking it over, this week.

[Treebore]

Serl definitely covers the essence of it. Here is an excerpt from my house rules showing how I handle feat concepts with the SIEGE engine:

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.
_________________
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

[Hrothgar Rannulfr]

Thanks, Treebore.

I'm not familiar with some of these abbreviations.

What is TN?

What is CL?

[Foxroe]

TN = Threshold/Target Number (base chance to succeed)

CL = Challenge Level (difficulty modifier)

-Fox

[Hrothgar Rannulfr]

Thanks, Foxroe!

[Tadhg]

Welcome Hrothgar!

Glad to have you with us.

Enjoy the game.

_________________
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

[Treebore]

Hrothgar Rannulfr wrote:
Thanks, Treebore.

I'm not familiar with some of these abbreviations.

What is TN?

What is CL?

Yep, so using a fireball as the spell for all examples:

To maximize: TN 18 (TN 12 + CL of 3+3=6)

To increase range: TN 18

To double area of effect: TN 18

To change it from fire to electricity/Acid/sonic: TN 15

Been using it for two years now, works very well IMO. I also allow pc's to earn the ability to do these things without a SIEGE check. I require 25 successful checks to be able to do it without checks from then on.
_________________
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

[imneuromancer]

Here's how I personally see how to run this. This is how I used to run it in AD&D.

It says in the rules for Hide: "Rogues use this ability to conceal themselves from others. A successful check means that the rogue is hidden so well as to be almost invisible. "

If the rogue makes their check, then NO ONE can make a check against them. The Hide ability is a special power, not a "skill" per se.

I actually allow very limited checks against them if the opposing character has a class or racial skill that would contest it; for example, Illusionists with Sharp Senses, elves with Enhanced senses, or Half-orcs with their sense of smell all have some way of detecting the presence (but maybe or maybe not the location) of the rogue.

The Rogue "Listen" power is another one that allows other rogues to detect each other. This could play out a lot like a sub hunt.... they don't see each other, they just detect the various traces of one another.....

FOR NORMAL CHARACTERS without the Hide ability, a dexterity check is opposed by the other characters' wisdom check to see if they can move silently.

So even a really, really dextrous fighter is just not going to be as good at moving silently and hiding as a rogue, but they still might have a good chance if DEX is their prime, etc.

Also note that spells like "detect invisibility" DO NOT (IIRC) detect "hidden" things, just things that have used the invisibility power/spell to hide!! So just because your wizard casts "detect invisibility" doesn't mean they can detect the rogue!!

[Foxroe]

Welcome imneuromancer!

Thieving abilities were also presented as more specialized than they appeared at first glance. Anyone could attempt to hide, but only a Thief could hide in plain sight using the surrounding shadows. Anyone could climb a rough surface, but only a Thief could climb seemingly impossible surfaces. Anyone could try to sneak up on an unwary guard, but only a Thief could be absolutely silent. Anyone could listen for noises, but only a Thief could pick up on the faintest sounds. Anyone could attempt to detect/remove traps, but only the Thief possessed the finesse necessary to disarm the trap without setting it off or damaging the trapped item. (etc...)

-Fox

[imneuromancer]

Foxroe: you have more succinctly described what I was trying to say, I believe.

The Rogues powers at first blush seem like "skills" that you can reproduce with ability checks. However, they are actually more like "powers" that allow the rogue to do some really spectacular stuff.

Just to give you an idea, only THREE people in the history of Ninja Warrior (the TV show, look it up on wikipedia) have been able to climb the final stage, which is a 50 foot rope in 30 seconds.

30 seconds = 3 CnC turns

a rogue can climb 1/2 of their move in a turn. A double move would make it 30 * 2 * 1/2 = 30 feet/turn

30 feet * 3 turns = 90 feet.

SO if my calculations are correct, any first level rogue could finish the final stage of Ninja Warrior without even a check. Easily. That's how cool they are....

[Hrothgar Rannulfr]

Thanks for all the help, everyone!

Would it be too far out to houserule that classes like rogues use a different Challenge Base than other classes that don't have the ability? A Challenge Base of 12 if it's not their Prime Attribute or a Challenge Base of 6 if it is their Prime Attribute that the SIEGE Check is based on???

For instance, Rohar the Rogue (13th level), Arkanis the Wizard (13th level), and Hrothgar the Fighter (13th level) all want to climb a wall. This particular wall is very difficult to climb. It has a challenge level of 12.

Assuming Rohar and Hrothgar both have the right Prime Attribute to climb (and the same score in that attribute), they will both add 13+X to the SIEGE Check (13 for their level and X for their attribute modifier). Arkanis doesn't has the same score in that attribute, but it's not a Prime Attribute for him. He still gets to add 13+X, but his challenge base will be higher.

Because Hrothgar is not a rogue, but he does have the right Prime Attribute. Hrothgar Challenge Base is 12.

Because Arkanis is not a rogue and he does not have the right Prime Attribute, Arkanis' Challenge Base is 18.

Because Rohar is a rogue and has the right Prime Attribute, his Challenge Base is 6. It's much easier for him because he's a rogue.

So, Hrothgar the Fighter needs to beat a 24 to climb the wall. And, Arkanis needs to beat a 30. Rohar only needs to beat an 18.

It's doable for all three. Very likely Rohar the Rogue will climb it very easily. Hrothgar will have a tougher time. And, Arkanis will need a bit of a lucky roll (or he'll just cast a spell).

What do you think???

[Foxroe]

Well it will certainly work, but then Rogues will quickly reach the point where thieving becomes too easy... about 6 levels sooner than normal.

-Fox

[Hrothgar Rannulfr]

Thanks.
About what level would you say they normally reach that point, Fox?

[Aramis]

Hrothgar Rannulfr wrote:
Would it be too far out to houserule that classes like rogues use a different Challenge Base than other classes that don't have the ability? A Challenge Base of 12 if it's not their Prime Attribute or a Challenge Base of 6 if it is their Prime Attribute that the SIEGE Check is based on???

For instance, Rohar the Rogue (13th level), Arkanis the Wizard (13th level), and Hrothgar the Fighter (13th level) all want to climb a wall. This particular wall is very difficult to climb. It has a challenge level of 12.

Assuming Rohar and Hrothgar both have the right Prime Attribute to climb (and the same score in that attribute), they will both add 13+X to the SIEGE Check (13 for their level and X for their attribute modifier). Arkanis doesn't has the same score in that attribute, but it's not a Prime Attribute for him. He still gets to add 13+X, but his challenge base will be higher.

An interesting idea. I think you will find that the vanilla SIEGE engine can handle the problem you are talking about. You have to first distinguish if this is really difficult climb that only a specialist might attempt or is merely a typical slope or man made incline, like a cliff face.

As some have mentioned above, certain skills are essentially limited to certain classes. It is especially important for thieves, whose abilities seem like any reasonably dextrous character might give it a try. But without his domain of skills, the thief character loses his specialness.

In your above example, I would guess that a climb with a difficulty of 12 was quite a difficult climb (described as 'very difficult', on p.110 PH). Maybe a sheer tower wall, at night, with an overhang, in the rain, with lightning flying
Note p.14 PH description of climb as an "extraordinary ability [that] allows a rogue to climb...[areas] that others would find impossible to climb". I think you should probably interpret the word "impossible" somewhat broadly. In other words, such climbs would probably only be undertaken by those with the Climb ability (Rangers outdoors, Rogues and Assasins both in and outdoors). And note how they are allowed to make typical climbs and inclines, like a cliff face,without even being required to make a check (where other characters could attempt it, but must roll a DEX SIEGE check)

Many other class abilities have similar descriptions. So, the first thing the CK must determine is whether other characters may attempt the action, or would it be encroaching into the class abilities of another class.

This is important, in a roundabout way of answering your house rule, because if the CK rules that this can only be done by that class, then other classes may not attempt it, at all.

If he instead rules that they may attempt it (and we will say that you have so decided, here), but it is in the domain of another class, then the character may attempt it but may not add his class level to the check. (All of this is discussed in the PH on p. 112).

So, what you will find is, there are many abilities that will seem to you the province of a particular class (or classes). Some you may not allow other classes to attempt at all. For others, one may only add one's class levels to checks that are within the scope of your class, and where your class experience would be valuable

So, in the above example, the fighter will have to roll equal or above 12 (CB) + 12 (CL) =24. He will roll D20 + Dex Mod. That's it.

The rogue on the other hand would have to equal or beat the same 24, but his roll would be D20 + Dex Mod +13 (rogue level). So assuming both have a +2 Dex Mod, the fighter will succeed never, even with a natural 20. The rogue on the other hand would succeed on a roll of 9 or better.

That should solve the problem of a rogue being no better than a fighter at a tricky climbing check

Where things can be a bit tricky is when a character tries to use a class skill in which he is not "prime". For example a rogue who tries to listen, who does not have wisdom prime, will only have a basic 10% chance of success (CB=18). So primes are very important to class. But again, in this case, the rogue could add his level to the roll, making his chances of success grow as he gains experience.

And again, note the description of listen "hear noises that others might not detect". Keep the rogue special!
Hope this makes things clearer, and not muddier.
_________________
"Kids, you tried your best, and you failed miserably. The lesson is: never try"

Homer Simpson

[imneuromancer]

Aramis (and others): The problem that I see with not giving various characters levels for doing "mundane" skills like climbing ropes or walls is severalfold

1) It means that higher level characters basically never advance skills. THat means that Conan the Barbarian would never get better at riding a horse, climbing a wall, or sneaking around the snake-god's temple between level 1 and 15. What?

2) It contradicts what the rules imply. At one point in the description, it says that a wizard that had seen a certain trap before may be able to use their level to detect another because they are "experienced" at seeing it now.

In the case of #2, that means that eventually the rogue/ranger/assassin abilities will all be "experienced" by others and you won't have anything special for those classes

So personally, I think you should just add level to "checks" that replicate "skills" (these terms are very slippery in CnC) almost all the time.

But then treat class abilities as essentially "powers" or "talents" or "spell-like abilities" (use the term you feel appropriate) for purposes of what they can do.

For example, characters require skill checks to climb a rope, but they would get their STAT+LEVEL+PRIME to do it.

*rogues* would just be able to do it, no check. If the rope was slippery and had poisonous barbs coming out of it, THEN they would have to make a check to see if they could do it. You may allow a "normal" character to attempt it, but at such a ridiculous CL that they realistically couldn't do it.

I think if you look at the SEIGE engine in this way, it drastically simplifies the whole system. You are almost always dealing with just 6 checks/saves instead of 12, you don't have to worry about adjudicating when you can and can't add level, and it makes the various class powers all the more spectacular and neat.

[Foxroe]

Hrothgar Rannulfr wrote:
About what level would you say they normally reach that point, Fox?

Well, I'm oversimplifying it a bit, but basically I assume that since the Rogue always adds his/her level to the SIEGE check for thieving abilities, and assuming that the SIEGE check uses a prime ability, AND assuming that the task dos not require a CL modifier, then the chance for success starts at 45% at first level. By 12th level, the Rogue has a 100% chance.

Using the system you propose, the Rogue would start out with a 75% chance of success, and then reach 100% by level 6. This won't be so bad as long as the CK keeps the tasks challenging (CL 6+ ).

-Fox

(PS - My math may be off by 5%/1 level... )

[Lord Stinger]

Welcome Hrothgar!

Welcome imneuromancer!
_________________
Ruler of Castle Scorpion in the Kingdom of the Scorpion

Duke Stinger, Lord of the Battlemasters of Nighthammer Keep, Castles & Crusades Society

You just think I missed you, give it a sec.

[Foxroe]

imneuromancer wrote:
Aramis (and others): The problem that I see with not giving various characters levels for doing "mundane" skills like climbing ropes or walls is severalfold...

I agree for the most part. The rules explicitly point out that characters get to add their level to SIEGE checks for class abilities; however, beyond that, the CK makes the call if the level is added or not. As a CK, you could make the call that that Wizard gets to add his level to the trap check.

Personally, if I feel that the task can be accomplished by anybody, and the skill applied is one that would improve with experience, then I would allow the level to be added to the check. Otherwise, I would only allow 1/2 level or no level at all. YMMV.

(...and I actually see Conan as more of a Fighter/Thief dual class myself... )

-Fox

[shadoes]

imneuromancer wrote:
Foxroe:

Just to give you an idea, only THREE people in the history of Ninja Warrior (the TV show, look it up on wikipedia) have been able to climb the final stage, which is a 50 foot rope in 30 seconds.

30 seconds = 3 CnC turns

a rogue can climb 1/2 of their move in a turn. A double move would make it 30 * 2 * 1/2 = 30 feet/turn

30 feet * 3 turns = 90 feet.

SO if my calculations are correct, any first level rogue could finish the final stage of Ninja Warrior without even a check. Easily. That's how cool they are....

Man I thought my wife and I were the only ones who watched that show. Nagano is my hero.

hmm wonder what some of the all stars would look like converted to CnC stats.....