Troll Lord Games

From what I understand, the only limitiations on selecting a class are primes. No rules exist limiting the selection of primes, except that one of them has to be the class prime. So, like D&D3.x, there is no issue with a strength 6 fighter.

I never liked this aspect of 3.x. Do the following fit with the rules philosophy of C&C?

A prime must have a minimum score of 9 or 10.

Primes restricted by race. (All dwarves must have con, elves dex or whatever.) This might cut humans back to 2 primes, but the only race with no restrictions.

Racial restrictions on classes. In AD&D, paladinhood seems to be a unique psychological affliction of humanity. Would limitations like this be appropriate to C&C.

Would a class limited to elves to mimic Holmes/BECMI elves be appropriate to C&C?

If thats the style of game you want, why not?
_________________
"We'll go out through the kitchen!" Tanis Half-Elven

Peter Bradley

As Peter said, if that's what you want to do, go for it. I'd think it would work just fine.

I actually liked that aspect of 3.x. I like that if Joe Weakling wanted to be a fighter, more power to him. He won't be very good at it, but if it's his cup of tea, so be it. C&C goes one more step and allows Joe Weakling to take Str as prime, which makes (at least) his attribute checks and saves a little easier.

Don't get me wrong, I'm old school-ish (playing since '86 going from BD&D to AD&D) and I did fine with racial restrictions and such, but I always thought that if I wanted a charismatic half-orc or a dwarf wizard then I should have one. YMMV
_________________
LD's C&C creations - the witch, a half-ogre, skill and 0-level rules

Troll Lord wrote:
Lord D: you understand where I"m coming from.

Echoing Gideon, if that's what you want to do then by all means do it. Personally, I have race/class restrictions in my C&C games equal to 1E. Knights and Paladins are (IMG) limited to humans and elves. I agree that the Paladin (as written) seems far more of a "Human" class than any other. Certainly more than dwarves or halflings or half-orcs.

Re: Primes; I don't have a problem with someone playing a STR 6 fighter with Prime. It just means he's been trained to use that STR well and can use it better than a STR 6 of any other class. It would have to be a RPing choice though because a STR 6 fighter is going to have a rough time; even with it being a Prime.

The Arms & Armor guide gives optional rules for many weapons requiring a minimum STR to use effectively (anything lower taking penalties) so if you use that it would make that STR 6 fighter in a real pickle!

As for the rules philosophy of C&C, that is to create a rules light game that hearkens back to older simpler game styles while making it flexible enough for you to make it work however you like. If you want a Holmes-Basic style C&C game, go for it. If you want 1E AD&D, or 2E, or 3X; again it can be done.

Basically its meant to be a game that you can tweak to fit your own playstyle!
Just IMO,

Mike
_________________
Always remember, as a first principle of all D&D: playing BtB is not now, never was and never will be old school.- Tim Kask, Dragonsfoot

I always thought class restrictions were silly. I can see the assumptions in the C&C PH text and of the people in this thread... I always envisioned Paladins as specially trained divine warriors belonging to a religion of some kind. That said, the divinity in my games takes alignment shapes at their core... Good, Evil, Law, Chaos. From that. You should assume that a divine warrior could be a fanatic of any of those elements as such people exist for each religious order. So, if humans aren't the only ones whom worship than they shouldn't be the only ones who can be paladins. Furthermore, I house rule Paladin abilities to emulate their alignment realizing that they won't necessarily be Good.
I know this seems like random tangent ranting but I wanted to show the OP an example of how people can take a look at C&C and make it their own. So, yeah, like everyone else said... Make C&C bend to your vision of a world.

May I hijack this thread, politely? Just for a moment? I don't want to create a brand new thread just for one question.

Would stream lining C&C ability scores 3.X style break the game? You guys know what I mean, I'm sure. It just seems simpler and a better fit for a quick paced, rules lite sort of game. It doesn't seem like it would break anything as far as I can tell but I'd like input.

I don't think it would, MacLeod. As long as you don't try to use one experience table, you should be fine. Biggest mistake 3.x ever did, IMNSHO.
_________________
LD's C&C creations - the witch, a half-ogre, skill and 0-level rules

Troll Lord wrote:
Lord D: you understand where I"m coming from.

While 3.X has done plenty wrong it still has some things right. I think most RPG systems have little gems here and there. I mentioned it in a previous thread but I've already finished what I feel is a balancing act between classes... yet to be play tested... which will allow me to do unified experience progression. Sorry to break your rules, guy. I just don't like the idea of people going up levels at different times... Its especially important relative to the people I play with. Others leveling while they are not will sow discontent... x_x They are a nitpicky sort.

Hey ML,

I understand a divine warrior for other races; just not the Paladin as written. A Dwarven holy warrior (IMO) would need something fundamentally different from the book Paladin as IMO its really geared for a human "Sir Galahad" type. If someone desperately wanted to run a halfling holy warrior I'd probably work with the player to come up with a class for the given religion. As you said you tweaked the Paladin to handle different alignments I'd say we are on the same page on this...if not the same sentence.
I think an old (pre 100) issue of Dragon did that; with a holy warrior derivitive for each alignment combo. Anyone remember the issue?

[/b]
_________________
Always remember, as a first principle of all D&D: playing BtB is not now, never was and never will be old school.- Tim Kask, Dragonsfoot

sieg wrote:
Hey ML,

I understand a divine warrior for other races; just not the Paladin as written. A Dwarven holy warrior (IMO) would need something fundamentally different from the book Paladin

They can turn water to mead in a 30 foot radius?
_________________
"We'll go out through the kitchen!" Tanis Half-Elven

Peter Bradley

This is a good idea. I demand a new edition with this included, immediately!!!
@sieg For sheezy, friend.
In the interest of discussion... what sort of impact do you imagine a dwarf would have on the paladin class, off the top of your head?

Before you answer I'll expound on my own silly little views.

I don't try to attach too much culture to a race in relation to a PC. This probably sounds insane but hear me out... Some people may not have the same views on each races' culture. Furthermore PCs are often unique members of their race. Different birth and childhood circumstances for instance. An elf born in a human settlement and raised by several generations of humans for instance. Such circumstances impact selection as decided by the back story written Player. I think this is why there are no racial restrictions or special racial-class powers. Its too easy to come up with a reason that an elf or halfling can be a paladin. Plus, I like to think that Good religious orders aren't racist.
Long-winded and probably pointless but there it is.

sieg wrote:
I think an old (pre 100) issue of Dragon did that; with a holy warrior derivitive for each alignment combo. Anyone remember the issue?

[/b]

That would be issue 106, the article was "A Plethora of Paladins".

I love my Dragon Archive, the one with the first 250 issues, including The Strategic Review...

Gimme?

koralas wrote:
That would be issue 106, the article was "A Plethora of Paladins".

I love my Dragon Archive, the one with the first 250 issues, including The Strategic Review...

It is a wonderful, wonderful resource. I love picking out a few magazines at random and looking back at some fantastic stuff.

MacLeod wrote:
While 3.X has done plenty wrong it still has some things right. I think most RPG systems have little gems here and there. I mentioned it in a previous thread but I've already finished what I feel is a balancing act between classes... yet to be play tested... which will allow me to do unified experience progression. Sorry to break your rules, guy. I just don't like the idea of people going up levels at different times... Its especially important relative to the people I play with. Others leveling while they are not will sow discontent... x_x They are a nitpicky sort.

Hehe. No worries. Maybe it's my nostalgia of the old days that likes the individual experience charts. Or maybe it was playing 3.x its entire run under the guise of fair and balanced classes. They made an admirable effort, no doubt, but they came up short. If you did what 3.x couldn't do and that 1st and 2nd Edition didn't even try, more power to you sir!
If it's especially important to your players, then yeah, that's undestandable...keep them happy. I think it might have been to mine, at one point, until they saw my point of the classes not being balanced and the xp chart being the "great equilizer."
_________________
LD's C&C creations - the witch, a half-ogre, skill and 0-level rules

Troll Lord wrote:
Lord D: you understand where I"m coming from.

I'm no braggart but I am trying to balance the classes. The quality of my efforts remain to be seen. I think 3.X came sort of close to a balance... but I agree, they could have done better.

I think in several ways a lot of the front line fighter types in C&C are balanced (with the exception of the Paladin gaining one trillion abilities).

The only requirements I place on a class, if a class system is to be used is this:

Magic-wielding characters must have a minimum Prime score for the class-related attribute of 9. The only magic-using class that can bypass this requirement is the "wild mage" or "sorcerer" (same class, different name -- just an "in-game" distinction) who is prevented from having the attribute at that value since it has always bothered me that, the more intelligent and wise, the more unpredictable the spells become... so, I'm reversing it.

Under the Morrowind conversion, the minimum for a primary Prime is 13 in the related attribute.
_________________
If it matters, leave a message at the beep.
Serl's Corner

Primary prime. @_@

I usually restrict a player's choice of class based on their IRL intelligence. Dumb people shouldn't be allowed to play genius wizards. But then again, I resent my players (I need a new group). x_x