My heavily house-ruled version of C&C

serleran · Post by **serleran** » Fri Jan 26, 2007 12:32 pm

Alrighty, send me an email then, at serleran [at] gmail period com, and I'll get you the hook-up. I've pdfd it to make it more portable.

Jason Vey · Post by **Jason Vey** » Fri Jan 26, 2007 2:04 pm

...how about mass combat rules? Scaleable, so you can do them tactically, or narrative?

Lurker · Post by **Lurker** » Fri Jan 26, 2007 2:43 pm

GREAT STUFF!!

A bit off topic, while scanning the links I saw there was a CD of 200+ Dragon mags out there. Does anyone know where I'll find one. I already ask "Noble Knight Games" but would like instant gratification....

Thanks for the help
_________________
"And so I am become a knight of the Kingdom of Dreams and Shadows!" - Mark Twain

Forgive all spelling errors.

Knight Errant & Humble C&C Society Contributor
C&C Society

Nelzie · Post by **Nelzie** » Fri Jan 26, 2007 3:03 pm

Lurker wrote:
GREAT STUFF!!

A bit off topic, while scanning the links I saw there was a CD of 200+ Dragon mags out there. Does anyone know where I'll find one. I already ask "Noble Knight Games" but would like instant gratification....

Thanks for the help

It's an old product from the waning days of TSR.

Ebay is the place you are most likely going to find it.
_________________
Earned the following:

50 Useless Trivia Points from Serleran

serleran · Post by **serleran** » Sat Jan 27, 2007 12:05 am

Or, me, who has all the issues as pdf. Of course, you lose the "search function," but oh well.

Orpheus · Post by **Orpheus** » Sat Jan 27, 2007 4:19 am

Uh...Do you really have them all in .pdf files? That's pretty cool. I'd really like to get my hands on some old Dungeon magazines in .pdf format.

Traveller · Post by **Traveller** » Sat Jan 27, 2007 4:29 am

Well...

I have them too, but 2.5GB of data through email is something that is not going to happen this decade or the next.

Best route to getting these is through other means than eBay, unless of course you want to spend $100 on an original. Whichever way you go though, make sure you download all the missing stuff from the Dragon Magazine Archive at WotC, and get the Creature Catalog I PDF from my site. Then you'll have everything you're supposed to have in those 250 issues.
_________________
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.

Treebore · Post by **Treebore** » Sat Jan 27, 2007 6:19 pm

I would love a CD of all the Dungeon issues, but I don't really care about most of the Dragon mags. As far as I know they still have no intention of doing a Dungeon mag CD. Bummer.

Birthright · Post by **Birthright** » Sat Jan 27, 2007 10:36 pm

Treebore wrote:
... As far as I know they still have no intention of doing a Dungeon mag CD. Bummer.

I asked paizo about this a couple of years back and their response was that they had no intention of producing it due to the legal difficulty in obtaining permission to "reprint" the content of the old DUNGEON mags.

It is a pipe dream of mine that one day there WILL be a Dungeon pdf compilation. I've got about 3/4 of the issues from 1-80ish (end of 2e AD&D modules) in hard copy, but a compilation in pdf would be brilliant!

Jason Vey · Post by **Jason Vey** » Tue Jan 30, 2007 2:09 pm

Ran the first scenario yesterday. It went over pretty well, though first level characters, I found, can have a pretty difficult time making a 15...even with Prime Attributes granting +5 to the roll. Perhaps changing your attribute bonus progression to the way it is in the SRD, as opposed to the way it is in C&C, would help matters a bit.

I also nearly TPK'ed my party with giant rats once, and with a hobgoblin zombie a second time...but that was more my fault than the rules. I forgot how fragile first-level characters can be.

After the first scenario, a basic little dungeon crawl from WotC's adventure archive called "A Dark and Stormy Knight," my rogue is nearly at 2nd level, the Monk is almost halfway there, and our Duelist/Cleric (using my duelist, not the UA one) has a long way to go, yet .

Overall it was fun, though; I have a little way to go before I get fluent with the nuances, and I did find myself referencing the C&C PHB here and there...but it's coming along nicely.

We did decide to import Cleric domains from the 3.5 SRD, as is, without modification, to give clerics that little something extra and unique, as well as give them an extra spell per day (b/c their spell progression is a bit chinsy).

csperkins1970 · Post by **csperkins1970** » Tue Jan 30, 2007 3:40 pm

The Grey Elf wrote:
Ran the first scenario yesterday. It went over pretty well, though first level characters, I found, can have a pretty difficult time making a 15...even with Prime Attributes granting +5 to the roll. Perhaps changing your attribute bonus progression to the way it is in the SRD, as opposed to the way it is in C&C, would help matters a bit.

We did decide to import Cleric domains from the 3.5 SRD, as is, without modification, to give clerics that little something extra and unique, as well as give them an extra spell per day (b/c their spell progression is a bit chinsy).

I'm working on adding Cleric domains to UA right now. They should make clerics a little more interesting/diversified.

Regarding ability checks: I was thinking (at first) of starting ability checks with a base of 10 (like armor class) and then modifying the rolls for difficulty. IF (a big if) I go back to that idea, I'd change the Prime bonus to +3 (I think).

Jason Vey · Post by **Jason Vey** » Tue Jan 30, 2007 3:41 pm

csperkins1970 wrote:
I'm working on adding Cleric domains to UA right now. They should make clerics a little more interesting/diversified.

Regarding ability checks: I was thinking (at first) of starting ability checks with a base of 10 (like armor class) and then modifying the rolls for difficulty. IF (a big if) I go back to that idea, I'd change the Prime bonus to +3 (I think).

I think 15 is fine; just alter the attribute bonus chart to reflect the 3.5 SRD instead of the C&C one. The higher bonuses will make a huge difference.

csperkins1970 · Post by **csperkins1970** » Tue Jan 30, 2007 3:59 pm

The Grey Elf wrote:
I think 15 is fine; just alter the attribute bonus chart to reflect the 3.5 SRD instead of the C&C one. The higher bonuses will make a huge difference.

Hmmm... I'll think that over. It just might work.

gideon_thorne · Post by **gideon_thorne** » Tue Jan 30, 2007 4:03 pm

Try this method. 12 for the class's prime, 15 for the secondary prime(s) and 18 for non prime.
_________________
"We'll go out through the kitchen!" Tanis Half-Elven

Peter Bradley

Orpheus · Post by **Orpheus** » Tue Jan 30, 2007 4:34 pm

gideon_thorne wrote:
Try this method. 12 for the class's prime, 15 for the secondary prime(s) and 18 for non prime.

Isn't that the one that cperkins uses in his "AD&D3" file? I rather like that one.
EDIT: I just realized which freakin' thread I'm in. To csperkins: I like your adaptation. Very cool.

Jason Vey · Post by **Jason Vey** » Tue Jan 30, 2007 5:11 pm

Orpheus wrote:
Isn't that the one that cperkins uses in his "AD&D3" file? I rather like that one.
EDIT: I just realized which freakin' thread I'm in. To csperkins: I like your adaptation. Very cool.

No, in AD&D3 the TN is a flat 15, and you get +5 for your primes.

Orpheus · Post by **Orpheus** » Tue Jan 30, 2007 5:38 pm

The Grey Elf wrote:
No, in AD&D3 the TN is a flat 15, and you get +5 for your primes.

Yeah, you're right. I can't remember where I've seen that recently. Maybe Medieval Murder Mysteries or Go For Yer Gun. I have egg on my face...TWICE!!!

Emryys · Post by **Emryys** » Tue Jan 30, 2007 6:35 pm

Orpheus wrote:
Yeah, you're right. I can't remember where I've seen that recently. Maybe Medieval Murder Mysteries or Go For Yer Gun. I have egg on my face...TWICE!!!

I think you're finally right...
I have both of these and I like the 3 levels of attributes... Even splitting a prime(+6) into 2 secondary attributes (+3).
_________________

csperkins1970 · Post by **csperkins1970** » Tue Jan 30, 2007 7:31 pm

Orpheus wrote:
EDIT: I just realized which freakin' thread I'm in. To csperkins: I like your adaptation. Very cool.

Thanks!! Your praise is much appreciated. If you use my alternate rules, feedback would be even more appreciated!

gideon_thorne · Post by **gideon_thorne** » Tue Jan 30, 2007 7:38 pm

Orpheus wrote:
Isn't that the one that cperkins uses in his "AD&D3" file? I rather like that one.
EDIT: I just realized which freakin' thread I'm in. To csperkins: I like your adaptation. Very cool.

*chuckles* It was something that came up a few years back when the game first came out actually. Its just a logical extension of the rules. ^_^
_________________
"We'll go out through the kitchen!" Tanis Half-Elven

Peter Bradley

Jason Vey · Post by **Jason Vey** » Wed Jan 31, 2007 4:42 pm

csperkins1970 wrote:
Thanks!! Your praise is much appreciated. If you use my alternate rules, feedback would be even more appreciated!

Again, for your skills rules, I think it's better to have a skill add +5 to any roll made with that skill. Generally, unless you're mimicking another class's ability, you always add your level to the roll, anyway, so having skills allow you to add your level is redundant. I went to the +5 (and enforced the "no level add for mimicking class abilities" on top of it) and it worked out brilliantly.

For example, I have a character with Knowledge (Religion) as a Knowledge skill. When he and the cleric make a roll, I treat the Cleric as though he had that skill by default (because it's what he does)* and grant him the +5 and his level. The guy with Knowledge: Religion adds +5 but not his level. Otherwise, the guy with Knowledge: Religion is just as good at that ability as the cleric. This is a bit specific, but I think the point stands. In general, you're going to add your character level to Intelligence or Wisdom checks anyway; having skills allow you to do that is moot. Having skills add +5 makes them really worthwhile, by treating the appropriate attribute (usually Int or Wis) as favored when using that skill, even if it's not normally favored. If it is favored, you're then adding a whopping +10 to your check, which makes it even more attractive to take Int or Wis as a favored attribute even if you're a fighter type.

*It also occurs to me that you might want to incorporate a class-specific Knowledge skill as a class ability for each class. Clerics would have Religion, Fighters could choose one from amongst Weaponsmith, Armorsmith, Tactics, Military History, etc., Wizards would have Arcana, Druids and Rangers Nature, Rogues could pick any one, Assassins might have Poison or Surveillance, etc. Bards don't really need a specific Knowledge skill; their Bardic Lore is pretty much a catch-all for them. In general, I think a DM should assume characters have knowledge appropriate to their class, but this would hammer it home a bit more concretely.

With fighters, I think if you're going to change it up, change it up. Get rid of the Combat Dominance ability and replace it with an ability that scales equivalent to the Cleave, Great Cleave, and Whirlwind Attack feats in the SRD. This makes fighters far more utilitarian and worthwhile to play. Let's face it; by the time you're 8th level, you have no business fighting creatures with 1d8 or less hit dice anyway. Cleave, on the other hand, remains useful no matter how high level you are. Just my $.02

csperkins1970 · Post by **csperkins1970** » Wed Jan 31, 2007 8:24 pm

The Grey Elf wrote:
Again, for your skills rules...

For skills, I was trying to get this across:

If you have a skill, you add your level bonus to the relevant check. If your don't have a skill, you don't.

That's why I grouped skills into the categories that I did. They aren't "everyman" abilities-- like swimming, interacting with others, estimating the number of approaching soldiers, perceiving what's around you,etc-- but are actually acquired through training or study. If you don't have Craft (blacksmith) you aren't a blacksmith and, as such, don't add your level to your ability check. If you don't have Profession (guide) or (hunter) you are not adding your level to checks to find your way in the wilderness.

With knowledge skills, it works the same way. If you haven't studied a particular field of knowledge, you don't add your level to the check.
For fighters, I was trying to:

Fix the limited utility (as I saw it) of C&C's combat dominance ability by fusing it with AD&D's system that allowed fighters 1 attack per level vs. 1 hit die opponents. At high levels, I've had plenty of players enjoy wading through mooks (ala Conan).

Cleave is kinda emulated by the Extra Attack ability... it just requires a stretch of the imagination.

Does this make sense or am I just being stubborn?

Jason Vey · Post by **Jason Vey** » Wed Jan 31, 2007 9:15 pm

csperkins1970 wrote:
For skills, I was trying to get this across:

If you have a skill, you add your level bonus to the relevant check. If your don't have a skill, you don't.

That's why I grouped skills into the categories that I did. They aren't "everyman" abilities-- like swimming, interacting with others, estimating the number of approaching soldiers, perceiving what's around you,etc-- but are actually acquired through training or study. If you don't have Craft (blacksmith) you aren't a blacksmith and, as such, don't add your level to your ability check. If you don't have Profession (guide) or (hunter) you are not adding your level to checks to find your way in the wilderness.

With knowledge skills, it works the same way. If you haven't studied a particular field of knowledge, you don't add your level to the check.

Which undermines and cheapens the entire idea behind adding your class level to any check that doesn't mimic another class's ability. It also contradicts your section on adding character level to ability checks in the same way.

Quote:
For fighters, I was trying to:

Fix the limited utility (as I saw it) of C&C's combat dominance ability by fusing it with AD&D's system that allowed fighters 1 attack per level vs. 1 hit die opponents. At high levels, I've had plenty of players enjoy wading through mooks (ala Conan).

I've never seen it. In fact, my players would be pretty jacked if they were 9th level going up against 1 HD creatures, because the meager XP isn't worth their time.

Quote:
Cleave is kinda emulated by the Extra Attack ability... it just requires a stretch of the imagination.

Not really. Fighters should get that extra attack AND be able to cleave through fallen foes. Cleave, Great Cleave, and Whirlwind Attack just let you do that against critters that are better than piddly 1 HD monsters.

Quote:
Does this make sense or am I just being stubborn?

Hey, your game. Just telling you what came out of my running it, is all. You did ask for feedback

csperkins1970 · Post by **csperkins1970** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 12:37 am

The Grey Elf wrote:
Which undermines and cheapens the entire idea behind adding your class level to any check that doesn't mimic another class's ability. It also contradicts your section on adding character level to ability checks in the same way.

Characters would still add their level to saves and all non-skill "tasks" --swimming, arm wrestling, drinking contests, staring contests, persuasion checks, perception checks, etc-- that aren't (a)class abilities or (b)background skills.

It makes sense that someone trained in a craft, profession, field of study or performing art should add their class level to that check. This would show that these background skills were improving as the character adventures and brings them to bear in their adventuring career. At the same time, someone who never trained in these skills shouldn't bring their experience to bear with these skills. I REALLY don't like the idea of all characters having an increasingly good chance at making skill checks that they've never trained in.

I'll look over what I wrote and try to clear this stuff up (obviously I could have written the sections on ability checks/skills a little clearer) and think of a better approach for differentiating between "stuff all characters can do" and "stuff only trained guys can do".

The Grey Elf wrote:
I've never seen it. In fact, my players would be pretty jacked if they were 9th level going up against 1 HD creatures, because the meager XP isn't worth their time.

By 9th level, the fighter will have a +2 to hit and damage on every attack and will have one more attack per round than any other fighter-type. The extra attacks against "mooks" only sweetens this advantage a little bit. Would it be better if I ditched Combat dominance and made the Extra Attack more effective (at the fighter's full BtH bonus).

The Grey Elf wrote:
Hey, your game. Just telling you what came out of my running it, is all. You did ask for feedback

Thanks for the feedback... really. I'll mull this over and wait to hear from you about the fighter changes.

pineappleleader · Post by **pineappleleader** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 3:39 am

csperkins1970 wrote:
For fighters, I was trying to:

Fix the limited utility (as I saw it) of C&C's combat dominance ability by fusing it with AD&D's system that allowed fighters 1 attack per level vs. 1 hit die opponents. At high levels, I've had plenty of players enjoy wading through mooks (ala Conan).

I once did this in a 1E AD&D game. There were two armies, dwarves and goblins, at battle in a huge field. The dwarves were out-numbered and losing. We helped them. I was part of a flying wedge of 6th-level fighters. Our MU was inside the wedge. Once we got him close enough, he dispelled the goblin shaman's magic and killed him. Then the slaughter began . It was close, but the dwarves won with our help.

It wasn't about experience points. I will never forget the day our party saved a whole Kingdom.

PS: It is a great rule for fighters. Nothing like 6 attacks per round to bring home the idea that you are surrounded and outnumbered. It is time to do or die!

Troll Lord Games

My heavily house-ruled version of C&C

Another thought...