Does C&C need a Revamp?

Traveller · Post by **Traveller** » Fri Dec 28, 2007 4:59 am

I haven't voted, and don't see a need to. The core concepts of the game are perfectly fine. About the only thing that the book could stand is perhaps a cleaning up of its prose. Of course, compared to the original three books of D&D back in 1974, C&C is a literary masterpiece.
_________________
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.

Deogolf · Post by **Deogolf** » Fri Dec 28, 2007 2:43 pm

sieg wrote:
Much of the issues currently under debate about C&C remind me of the discussions that go on at dragonsfoot about XYZ in 1E/2E Classic A/D&D. The game works as is; if people think the Barbarian needs work (and I do), then come up with a variant. Submit it to the Crusader, or just here on the site. Same with other things (Like Tre's spell refocus; which is a good idea IMO).

All in all, disagreement and debate (as long as its civil) is a good thing and perfect to get everyone's creative juices flowing!

I totall agree. The game is what you make it. If there is something you don't like or feel is "clunky", whatever it is - change it. It's what Gary has been saying for decades and what players sometime have a hard time getting their head around. If you don't like it, change it!! It's not that hard to do. It's more fun if you're not beating on the book all the time trying to find a certain rule for something - that's what that other edition is for. Wing it and have fun!!
_________________
Eulaliaaa!!! Give those rapscallions blood and vinegar, wot?!

Be sure to check out Jim's artwork for sale:
http://jimhollowayart.com/id5.html

Zudrak · Post by **Zudrak** » Fri Dec 28, 2007 4:08 pm

Deogolf wrote:
I totall agree. The game is what you make it. If there is something you don't like or feel is "clunky", whatever it is - change it. It's what Gary has been saying for decades and what players sometime have a hard time getting their head around. If you don't like it, change it!! It's not that hard to do. It's more fun if you're not beating on the book all the time trying to find a certain rule for something - that's what that other edition is for. Wing it and have fun!!

I concur. I played 1e AD&D without weapon speeds, weapon v. armor rules, and with house rules thrown in. There will never be "perfect rules" as long as you have a game trying to quantify into game terms things that are unquantifiable. Like the poster who said it is akin to coming home from Home Depot with supplies, make it your own and...

Game on!

Happy gaming,

Zudrak
_________________
AD&D, Amish Dungeons & Dragons.

"Galstaff, ye are in a cornfield, when a moustachioed man approaches. What say ye?"

"I shun him."

-----

"Knowledge, logic, reason, and common sense serve better than a dozen rule books."

-- E. Gary Gygax

dutch206 · Post by **dutch206** » Mon Dec 31, 2007 9:56 pm

To the OP: "New version of the rules" is not a phrase I am very fond of right now.
_________________
Please. I have dice that are older than you are.

Telhawk · Post by **Telhawk** » Mon Dec 31, 2007 10:10 pm

I'd like to think the strength of the SEIGE engine has been aptly demonstrated, both in the games my brothers and I have played over the last nine months or so, and in the fact that Troll Lords' sales have obviously been vigorous enough to allow them to start expanding the realm.

The "small stuff" referred to applies, I think, mostly in typo clean-up (and I can't tell how many times I've seen people disparage C&C because of editing issues, immaterial as that might ultimately be), addressing contradictions in the PHB and M&T, and tweaking some of the game mechanics - such as surprise - that might not be completely up to snuff.

All the above are pretty much easily houseruled; however, it is nice to have the administration take note of these issues and smooth out the wrinkles. Just part of the ongoing and soon-to-be-completed quest for perfection.

Julian Grimm · Post by **Julian Grimm** » Tue Jan 01, 2008 3:30 am

dutch206 wrote:
To the OP: "New version of the rules" is not a phrase I am very fond of right now.

I believe that term was never used. And later on it was confirmed that "revamp" shouldn't have been used since 'cleanup' was the word that best described the intent of the poll.
_________________
The Lord of Ravens
My blog

Julian Grimm · Post by **Julian Grimm** » Tue Jan 01, 2008 3:40 am

Telhawk wrote:
I'd like to think the strength of the SEIGE engine has been aptly demonstrated, both in the games my brothers and I have played over the last nine months or so, and in the fact that Troll Lords' sales have obviously been vigorous enough to allow them to start expanding the realm.

The "small stuff" referred to applies, I think, mostly in typo clean-up (and I can't tell how many times I've seen people disparage C&C because of editing issues, immaterial as that might ultimately be), addressing contradictions in the PHB and M&T, and tweaking some of the game mechanics - such as surprise - that might not be completely up to snuff.

All the above are pretty much easily houseruled; however, it is nice to have the administration take note of these issues and smooth out the wrinkles. Just part of the ongoing and soon-to-be-completed quest for perfection.

All I would want is both the PH and M&T unified into one volume with the item descriptions introduced, spell schools returned and clarification of rough parts of the text. Maybe and I do stress maybe it would be nice to include a small gazzeteer of Outrermere as a base for adventures.
_________________
The Lord of Ravens
My blog

Tadhg · Post by **Tadhg** » Tue Jan 01, 2008 3:49 am

Traveller wrote:
The core concepts of the game are perfectly fine. About the only thing that the book could stand is perhaps a cleaning up of its prose. Of course, compared to the original three books of D&D back in 1974, C&C is a literary masterpiece.

_________________
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

CharlieRock · Post by **CharlieRock** » Tue Jan 01, 2008 7:05 am

Julian Grimm wrote:
All I would want is both the PH and M&T unified into one volume with the item descriptions introduced, spell schools returned and clarification of rough parts of the text. Maybe and I do stress maybe it would be nice to include a small gazzeteer of Outrermere as a base for adventures.

We could start a thread on item descriptions and spell schools. I could do without spell schools but I can still add stuff in if I see it fits. One thing I would like to see is a solo adventure in the beginning of the PHB for people with no clue how a RPG works (there are some folks out there like this still ). Like the one in the red box where Bargle (?) killed that cleric with magic missle but you got to clobber his gobbo bud. The white box C&C has Rising Knight. But nothing for the hardback PHB which is what most new players are going to see in stores and grab.
_________________
The Rock says ...

Know your roll!

serleran · Post by **serleran** » Tue Jan 01, 2008 6:49 pm

Item descriptions are done, and have been done. I made them available to everyone who wanted them. Not many did. Must not be that big a deal, then, eh?

CharlieRock · Post by **CharlieRock** » Tue Jan 01, 2008 7:21 pm

serleran wrote:
Item descriptions are done, and have been done. I made them available to everyone who wanted them. Not many did. Must not be that big a deal, then, eh?

Really? Was it illustrated? I like pictures.
_________________
The Rock says ...

Know your roll!

Julian Grimm · Post by **Julian Grimm** » Tue Jan 01, 2008 8:23 pm

serleran wrote:
Item descriptions are done, and have been done. I made them available to everyone who wanted them. Not many did. Must not be that big a deal, then, eh?

I do have those. What I was talking about was including them in the PH which to date, hasn't been done.
_________________
The Lord of Ravens
My blog

Treebore · Post by **Treebore** » Tue Jan 01, 2008 8:43 pm

Julian Grimm wrote:
I do have those. What I was talking about was including them in the PH which to date, hasn't been done.

There is one big reason why these have not been added. Increase the page count the book cost will be increased. Its going to be increased with the next printing irregardless. Increase the page count and the cost will jump even more.

I have plenty of item books with pictures. So when my kids ask "What does it look like?" I have a half dozen or so books to show them with. Same with any other player at my table.

My online groups and I have been finding out that Google search, etc... comes up with real world examples pretty fast.

So I think such a list is of far more use to people who are "new" to RPG's, for the most part.
_________________
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

serleran · Post by **serleran** » Tue Jan 01, 2008 11:18 pm

Quote:
Really? Was it illustrated?

Yes.

csperkins1970 · Post by **csperkins1970** » Wed Jan 02, 2008 12:47 am

Dragonhelm wrote:
I'm the lone voter who said yes to a revamp, though I wonder if I should have voted for option three.

For the most part, I think C&C is fine the way it is. I would see a few things changed, though. I'd like to see a unified XP table, HD progression above 12th level rather than a flat bonus to HP, and some sort of skill system.

That being said, I can house rule most of that, so I'm fine with it as it is. I'm with Treebore on making C&C my own.

You're not alone. I voted for a revamp as well. I REALLY enjoy the game as run by my friend Mike BUT find that we have to houserule quite a bit in order to get the game to work well.

I realize that that's one of the game's strengths (that each group will fine-tune it to their collective tastes) but think that the game can be cleaned up quite a bit.

Unified XP charts, classes that are better-balanced against one another, a simple skill system (not that presented in CZ), more spells available for casters, a more easily implemented encumbrance system and rules for multiclassing/dual-classing would top the list.

The game is simple, but could be made elegantly simple.

Treebore · Post by **Treebore** » Wed Jan 02, 2008 1:01 am

Could you explain how you consider the classes to be poorly balanced against each other? I have done some tweaking myself, but I have done it because I thought some of their powers were too weak for the XP's they were paying.

Plus 3E proved to me that balancing classes under a unified XP chart doesn't work well either. So I think the various XP charts actually do a better job of balancing things.

Which I think the CKG will illustrate much more clearly. Essentially, in C&C, you get what you pay for, with XP's.

So to me its a question of "Do I get my XP's worth?" rather than "Is my class as powerful as the one next to me?"
_________________
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

csperkins1970 · Post by **csperkins1970** » Wed Jan 02, 2008 1:19 am

Treebore wrote:
Could you explain how you consider the classes to be poorly balanced against each other? I have done some tweaking myself, but I have done it because I thought some of their powers were too weak for the XP's they were paying.

Plus 3E proved to me that balancing classes under a unified XP chart doesn't work well either. So I think the various XP charts actually do a better job of balancing things.

Which I think the CKG will illustrate much more clearly. Essentially, in C&C, you get what you pay for, with XP's.

So to me its a question of "Do I get my XP's worth?" rather than "Is my class as powerful as the one next to me?"

Some examples:

Spellcasters, over time, are overpowered because it becomes nigh impossible to make saves (I've tweaked this by using a 10/15 split for Challenge Bases).

Barbarians are awful. Rage is debilitating and doesn't really help all that much when used.

Fighters are bland. Combat Dominance is bleh... at best. It should encompass all 1 hit die creatures with a d8 HD (all monsters should use d8s for hit dice, with bonuses per die pumping up hit points). Weapon Specialization should improve every few levels... not just once, at level 7.

Rangers seem to be a favorite class for the game's designers and, imho, rock when compared to other fighter-types. Combat Marauder damage bonuses should "cap out"... otherwise you're adding double-digits to your damage after 9th level. This shames the poor fighter. Other than that, rangers have other great abilities. Other fighter-types should have been balanced against the ranger.

Multiclassing (via CZ) doesn't work too well.

There's more but I'm off to watch the telly with my wife.

If you want to see how I revamped C&C, see:
http://homepages.nyu.edu/~dp58/AD&D3.pdf

I think it brings all characters in line with one another (and with their "power levels" in AD&D... including Unearthed Arcana).

Treebore · Post by **Treebore** » Wed Jan 02, 2008 1:45 am

csperkins1970 wrote:
Some examples:

Spellcasters, over time, are overpowered because it becomes nigh impossible to make saves (I've tweaked this by using a 10/15 split for Challenge Bases).

Barbarians are awful. Rage is debilitating and doesn't really help all that much when used.

Fighters are bland. Combat Dominance is bleh... at best. It should encompass all 1 hit die creatures with a d8 HD (all monsters should use d8s for hit dice, with bonuses per die pumping up hit points). Weapon Specialization should improve every few levels... not just once, at level 7.

Rangers seem to be a favorite class for the game's designers and, imho, rock when compared to other fighter-types. Combat Marauder damage bonuses should "cap out"... otherwise you're adding double-digits to your damage after 9th level. This shames the poor fighter. Other than that, rangers have other great abilities. Other fighter-types should have been balanced against the ranger.

Multiclassing (via CZ) doesn't work too well.

There's more but I'm off to watch the telly with my wife.

If you want to see how I revamped C&C, see:
http://homepages.nyu.edu/~dp58/AD&D3.pdf

I think it brings all characters in line with one another (and with their "power levels" in AD&D... including Unearthed Arcana).

Cool. I agree there are "issues". Your rewrite of the Barbarian is pretty good. I agree fighters are bland, but what are supposed to do? They are good at two things, hitting and dealing damage. So the only meaningful tweaks to do would be to increase those.

So I agree making specialization occur more often would be nice. I just don't see as increasing their effectiveness at being "bland" as effective at dealing with the problem of blandness. IE your taking a small bowl of blandness and turning it into a bigger bowl of blandness.

Maybe adding "powers" along the lines of the Knight and Paladin? Maybe allow them a stun attack similar to the Monk? Give them their own version of inspirational leadership?

Lots of possibilities. Which comes back to why I love C&C as much as I do. Its so darn easy to tweak with because you can do it around the SIEGE mechanic.
_________________
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

serleran · Post by **serleran** » Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:08 am

Heh, it is very interesting to see what areas seem to need "clarification" or are considered "weak." Always the same, though, regardless of the game and edition.... rather funny. Half like it, half hate it, and the other half just doesn't care.

Julian Grimm · Post by **Julian Grimm** » Wed Jan 02, 2008 3:18 am

Treebore wrote:
There is one big reason why these have not been added. Increase the page count the book cost will be increased. Its going to be increased with the next printing irregardless. Increase the page count and the cost will jump even more.

I have plenty of item books with pictures. So when my kids ask "What does it look like?" I have a half dozen or so books to show them with. Same with any other player at my table.

My online groups and I have been finding out that Google search, etc... comes up with real world examples pretty fast.
So I think such a list is of far more use to people who are "new" to RPG's, for the most part.

The itallicized reason is why they need to be in there. We need to remember that not all players will have several editions of AD&D to draw from when playing and that this will help the newer players as well some of us older players who wonder what the hell Laminar Leather really is.

I would gladly pay a bit more for a PH with this in there.
_________________
The Lord of Ravens
My blog

csperkins1970 · Post by **csperkins1970** » Wed Jan 02, 2008 3:39 am

Treebore wrote:
Cool. I agree there are "issues". Your rewrite of the Barbarian is pretty good. I agree fighters are bland, but what are supposed to do? They are good at two things, hitting and dealing damage. So the only meaningful tweaks to do would be to increase those.

So I agree making specialization occur more often would be nice. I just don't see as increasing their effectiveness at being "bland" as effective at dealing with the problem of blandness. IE your taking a small bowl of blandness and turning it into a bigger bowl of blandness.

Maybe adding "powers" along the lines of the Knight and Paladin? Maybe allow them a stun attack similar to the Monk? Give them their own version of inspirational leadership?

Lots of possibilities. Which comes back to why I love C&C as much as I do. Its so darn easy to tweak with because you can do it around the SIEGE mechanic.

That's the thing... I really dig C&C and have bought EVERY printing of the PHB, as well as CZ, the CK Screen, and Monsters & Treasures, in order to give the Troll Lords my patronage. I think a healthy discussion of what can be improved upon makes for a better game.

As for a fighter fix, I just think they need a little boost in power. My revised fighter isn't that much more exciting or that different BUT I think it's a little more fun to play and in the same league as the ranger. Same goes for my take on the cavalier. Each rocks when in his particular niche...

Treebore · Post by **Treebore** » Wed Jan 02, 2008 3:39 am

Julian Grimm wrote:
The itallicized reason is why they need to be in there. We need to remember that not all players will have several editions of AD&D to draw from when playing and that this will help the newer players as well some of us older players who wonder what the hell Laminar Leather really is.

I would gladly pay a bit more for a PH with this in there.

Yeah, I see the "need" as well, but I've been wondering if another product would be best for it. I was thinking maybe adding a couple of pages to the character sheet booklet with this material? It already has the handy dandy price list, so adding the item descriptions and their pictures kind of makes sense too. In fact, adding these in there would make even more sense.

Guess it really comes down to pricing and the effects the additional pages would have.
_________________
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

CharlieRock · Post by **CharlieRock** » Wed Jan 02, 2008 8:16 am

I've found fighters to be quite fun to play with weapon mastery rules. All the combat characters got into a rut at the higher levels. The only modification to weapons mastery we made was the to-hit bonus is not used as written originally.

Also, Palladium has a weapon compendium book that is really too cool for words. It's just gobs and gobs of pictures of weapons, armor, and castles. Even a oriental volume.
_________________
The Rock says ...

Know your roll!

serleran · Post by **serleran** » Wed Jan 02, 2008 3:56 pm

Quote:
Also, Palladium has a weapon compendium book that is really too cool for words.

That would be the Compendium of Arms, Armour, and Castles.

Its actually an expanded reprint of an earlier product.

And, yes, it kicks ass. Has over 700 weapons in it.

Omote · Post by **Omote** » Wed Jan 02, 2008 4:06 pm

serleran wrote:
That would be the Compendium of Arms, Armour, and Castles.

Its actually an expanded reprint of an earlier product.

And, yes, it kicks ass. Has over 700 weapons in it.

Cool product for sure, but for the big expanded and revised book I just wish they would have gotten better artists for the weapons. The art for them is pretty rough, generally.

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

serleran · Post by **serleran** » Wed Jan 02, 2008 4:16 pm

True, but it does have them, and that's better than not, as the vast majority of these weapons are pretty obscure. Artistically, the best section is the armor chapter, I think. I also like the text write-ups before going into the stats, but wish some of it would have been a little more in-depth.

Nelzie · Post by **Nelzie** » Wed Jan 02, 2008 5:05 pm

Basically, I am going to say that it requires no "revamp".

I see "Revamp" as a major change that would require some kind of New Edition.

What I do see is a need for some minor tweaks, rewriting some of the spell descriptions to enhance/fix areas that are far to nebulous. As well as similar tweaks for certain rules and perhaps some class abilities or at least an option or two for certain class abilities. (Like the Fighter's Combat Dominance.)

Beyond that, I agree with an early poster about alternate classes and such being sent into "The Crusader" for publication, as well as optional/additional complexities that some may wish to add to their game.

Some of that could/should be put into the CKG, which I would really enjoy buying sometime soon...
_________________
Earned the following:

50 Useless Trivia Points from Serleran

Omote · Post by **Omote** » Wed Jan 02, 2008 6:43 pm

The only revamp I would like to see would be the following checklist:

Castles & Crusades: The Anime Edition

Castles & Crusades: The Deluxe Edition (DONE)

Castles & Crusades: The Basic Edition (IN THE WORKS)

Castles & Crusades: The Cyclopedia Edition

Castles & Crusades: The Omote Edition (FOREVER IN THE WORKS)

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

serleran · Post by **serleran** » Wed Jan 02, 2008 6:55 pm

I'm going to release a C&C: Serleran's Special in about 5 years. Maybe sooner.

Julian Grimm · Post by **Julian Grimm** » Sun Jan 06, 2008 12:52 am

Treebore wrote:
Yeah, I see the "need" as well, but I've been wondering if another product would be best for it. I was thinking maybe adding a couple of pages to the character sheet booklet with this material? It already has the handy dandy price list, so adding the item descriptions and their pictures kind of makes sense too. In fact, adding these in there would make even more sense.

Guess it really comes down to pricing and the effects the additional pages would have.

A C&C take on the Arms and Equipment Guide would be a cool edition and a compromise to that issue.
_________________
The Lord of Ravens
My blog