Playing C&C btb or house ruling.

[slimykuotoan]

I've been playing C&C (1st - 3rd printings) absolutely btb for one of the games I'm in, and it's been a fantastic experience.

And thou?

[Arduin]

Someone recently asked this question...

[Captain_K]

I'm pretty much BTB if you include the three sisters and overlook kindnesses like "max HP at first level".. a few house rules that get hp and spells back quick and allow cleric and druid (and illusionist) a bit more healing.. so its not 100% but more like 90%. T

That might be a better way to "plot" your question, "What % of the core CnC rules to you modify?" and give them say 10% or 25% increments, not all or nothing. I'm guessing you'll get 80%+ some level of house rules.

[slimykuotoan]

Lol, no. I'd truly like to see if any have EVER played C&C absolutely btb.

Verrrry, curious indeedy...

[Tadhg]

To the best of my knowledge, I have not played in a C&C that didn't have house rules.

[I honestly can't remember if Steve had house rules in his CON game]

I can say however, that when I first ran C&C for my gaming group - it was completely BTB for the first year or so.

[alcyone]

Sure, I've run BtB games. Especially when I first got it; I don't like to run a game house ruled until I know how well it runs BtB.

[Rigon]

Sure, I've run BtB games. Especially when I first got it; I don't like to run a game house ruled until I know how well it runs BtB.

That's what I did with the game. Also, when I introduce it to new players, I go by the book.

R-

[slimykuotoan]

Verily cool Rhuvein, Aergraith and Rigon!

[seskis281]

One could argue using house rules IS playing C&C "by-the-book."

[alcyone]

One could argue using house rules IS playing C&C "by-the-book."

Indeed, the Book contains a framework for the neophyte to gain basic understanding of the game's mysteries. It also serves as a token which one can bring to the Table.

The Table is where the game and its rules and secrets can be found, typically found in the Castle of the Keeper or his or her virtual environs.

The Forums are another place where scholars of the game can be found, and will endlessly argue the finer points of the Book and the Table, but the Table and its Keepers are where the game truly exists and is the only place where meaningful rules live and breathe. Some say the members of the Forums are fools, though it is rumored the game's very creators sometimes walk among its ranks. This much is known, however; that their many and varied pronouncements and decrees are never Law in the Castle of the Keeper, where their Iron Thumb and the Will of the Dice control the fates of the game's players.

[Tadhg]

Hmmm, are you sipping bourbon, Monsieur Aergraith. You wax eloquent this evening!

[alcyone]

Hmmm, are you sipping bourbon, Monsieur Aergraith. You wax eloquent this evening!

I'm not, and in Texas I can't buy any on Sunday. (eyes the Mezcal on the counter)

[Treebore]

One could argue using house rules IS playing C&C "by-the-book."

The Trolls themselves have said numerous times that many things were left ambiguous or completely ignored for each individual CK to decide how they want to do "it". So yeah, House Ruling C&C is doing it BtB! (Lack of AC stacking rules, I am still GLARING at you!)

[Treebore]

As to Slimy's question, I've done it both ways, but I far and away enjoy C&C much more with my House Rules than BtB. For campaigns, anyways. For short games, like one shots, or "Hey, lets play this module going BtB!" scenarios I am fine with going by the book. But playing long term I won't do because the lack of certain rules, etc.. will irritate me too often. Especially for issues I have already addressed within my own house rules, such as AC stacking, loss of levels via draining, actual guidelines for making potions, pricing for Expert weapons that are far more consistent and realistic, rules for actually using the SIEGE engine in place of feats or advantages, etc...

[alcyone]

If I were to use any house rules, I'd give careful consideration to Tree's hard-won rules. They are actually fairly conservative and born of actual issues and sticking points and aren't a bad place to start your own house rules; they are based on things that will actually come up.

[Captain_K]

Yeah Humans speaking just one language always fries me... I love multi-cultures, multi-races and playing regions/countries with their own language so multi-lingual is the house rule to allow it to play...

[Kayolan]

My preferred style is to go by the book and to ad hoc the stuff that isn't in the book. I don't like making house rules anymore, they only add more rules and box me in. I would rather exercise my judgement depending on the situation at hand instead of referring to yet another rule.

[Treebore]

I would rather exercise my judgement depending on the situation at hand instead of referring to yet another rule.

A fair number of those "case by case" situations re occur, so you may want to write down how you handle them the first time so you can consistently handle them when they re occur. Thats my primary reason for even having house rules, to recall how I decided to handle it last time, especially on complex things like new class write ups, level drain, polymorphing and Teleporting. Plus, when you decide on things like AC stacking, if you have it in writing, your players can know that up front. Assuming they even read and learn the House Rules of the game they play in.

[Kayolan]

I would rather exercise my judgement depending on the situation at hand instead of referring to yet another rule.

A fair number of those "case by case" situations re occur, so you may want to write down how you handle them the first time so you can consistently handle them when they re occur. Thats my primary reason for even having house rules, to recall how I decided to handle it last time, especially on complex things like new class write ups, level drain, polymorphing and Teleporting. Plus, when you decide on things like AC stacking, if you have it in writing, your players can know that up front. Assuming they even read and learn the House Rules of the game they play in.

True, but then I would be giving the players my secrets of the inner workings of the Castle Keeper.

Consistency is not a concern of mine, I rule things on the spot and that's how it goes, the player is told what happens or I say "roll a 20 sider". Though I try to be fair, I will not box myself in and have the players tell me how to run the game because of the rules that I myself have created, there are enough rules in the game already.

About armor stacking, not a problem in my btb game, magic is hard to come by and players are rolling 3d6 for their attributes, so I let them stack as per the rules (or lack of restrictions).

[Treebore]

I would rather exercise my judgement depending on the situation at hand instead of referring to yet another rule.

A fair number of those "case by case" situations re occur, so you may want to write down how you handle them the first time so you can consistently handle them when they re occur. Thats my primary reason for even having house rules, to recall how I decided to handle it last time, especially on complex things like new class write ups, level drain, polymorphing and Teleporting. Plus, when you decide on things like AC stacking, if you have it in writing, your players can know that up front. Assuming they even read and learn the House Rules of the game they play in.

True, but then I would be giving the players my secrets of the inner workings of the Castle Keeper.

Consistency is not a concern of mine, I rule things on the spot and that's how it goes, the player is told what happens or I say "roll a 20 sider". Though I try to be fair, I will not box myself in and have the players tell me how to run the game because of the rules that I myself have created, there are enough rules in the game already.

About armor stacking, not a problem in my btb game, magic is hard to come by and players are rolling 3d6 for their attributes, so I let them stack as per the rules (or lack of restrictions).

Well, if they make you feel boxed in, thats understandable. I don't feel boxed in, I think it helps me be consistent. Plus it prevents me from agonizing yet again on how to handle something I've already worked out once. If I find out down the road that it doesn't work, I change it again. You've been playing with me for years, you know how I do it.

[Kayolan]

Totally get it, though it's when I have the house rules that I am wanting to change them over and over again, I figure, why do it then? You do have a solid set of house rules and I enjoy playing in your games, but to be honest Treebore, I've never been a big rules guy, it's not the rules you use that makes your games fun, it's the atmosphere that I enjoy the most.

[Snoring Rock]

Totally get it, though it's when I have the house rules that I am wanting to change them over and over again, I figure, why do it then? You do have a solid set of house rules and I enjoy playing in your games, but to be honest Treebore, I've never been a big rules guy, it's not the rules you use that makes your games fun, it's the atmosphere that I enjoy the most.

Agreed. I have used the rules btb since day one (less the critical hit/miss rules from the CKG and max hp at first level) . That is why I come back to these forums so often. Usually looking for ideas. I only recently added a few house rules, and I am not sure I like that. I prefer to rule on the run in-game. If the players understand that, then it is "normal" for them.

I really do not like players saying "but the PHB says". That is the main paradigm difference in old-school and 3.x/Pathfinder. The rules used to be owned by the GM. With 3.x/Pathfinder, the rules are shared by all, there is not "keeper". It is less of a story that way. I prefer to make rulings that are mine. Too many house rules can become just as rules heavy as the games I left to come to C&C to begin with. But then again, if you like house rules, then C&C is the game for you.

[serleran]

House rule, nearly always. Maybe 2-3 sessions with no changes, and then RAW gets thrown away because I can't help but change it all.