Do I understand this rule correctly?

vivsavage · Post by **vivsavage** » Sat Sep 09, 2006 2:54 pm

Is this correct?

A 5th ranger with non-Prime 15 DEX has a lesser chance of succeeding on a move silently attempt than a 1st level cleric with a Prime Dex of 13? The ranger would need to beat an 18 (using a bonus of 5 levels + 1 DEX = 6), while the cleric would need to beat a 12 (with +1 DEX bonus and no level bonus). Thus the cleric has a slightly better chance of succeeding. I'm interpreting that as I read it in the rules. Obviously you could houserule this and say the cleric gets a penalty for not having skill like the ranger does.

Likewise, a low level PC with training/ability in something can have a lesser chance of success than someone of higher level who has no training in the same thing if the CK allows the non-trained character the bonus of adding in his levels?

Also, it seems perhaps a bit odd to me that the ranger's prime attribute is STR, when his abilities are mostly ruled by WIS and DEX. All other classes seem consistent with regard to prime attributes and attribute test abilities.

None of this is a big deal, but I'm a bit of an "over-analyzer" when it comes to rules.

Omote · Post by **Omote** » Sat Sep 09, 2006 3:19 pm

Over analyzer huh, is it possible that you've been playing too much v3.5? I got coaught up in the analyzation process of C&C as well because I my extensive play time in v3.5. Really, it took me a while to get out of that mode. The C&C game will break down at times into tiny bits of things that don't seem to make sense... but that comes with the over-analyzation of the game IMO. In playing the game, these little foibles never become a problem. The game is too "open" for that kind of thinking, again IMO.

Play in peace my friend.
...........................................Omote

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

Post by **Breakdaddy** » Sat Sep 09, 2006 3:25 pm

Well, the game doesn't take you by the short and curlies like 3.5 does and shake you like a quaker, so you can houserule it if it bothers you. I think the prime for Ranger is good, because it means that only a human will be an expert ranger at all the ranger skills, and the Demi Humans will have to choose which way the want to go. Elves might be masters at moving silently in the forest but they are not necessarily great at setting traps. This seems plausible to me and helps keep the game slightly more human-centric, which is a good thing, IMO. YMMV and all that, so houserule it into the next lifetime if it doesnt suit your play style, the 3.5 police are not allowed in our house so nobody will grief you on it.

vivsavage · Post by **vivsavage** » Sat Sep 09, 2006 3:30 pm

Omote wrote:
Over analyzer huh, is it possible that you've been playing too much v3.5?

While I own a lot of 3.5 books, I've never played it -- it's too bulky, too obsessed with little rules, etc. I've been an overanalyzer for about 20 years when it comes to RPGs. I do it with every game I buy, alas. Wish I didn't. But C&C's attitude of "houserule it" is the perfect fit. You don't feel like you're commiting a mortal sin if you change something.

Treebore · Post by **Treebore** » Sat Sep 09, 2006 4:15 pm

Speaking of house rule, I treat this situation as if the ranger has a Prime with regard to moving silently. Same with any other similiar "situation".

Dristram · Post by **Dristram** » Sat Sep 09, 2006 4:28 pm

Keep in mind the armor. The Ranger can move silently if he's wearing the armor on his list, while the Cleric should suffer penalties from any armor he's wearing. Even leather armor as it will be restrictive enough to cause at least some balance issues while trying to keep silent while moving.

So, if both classes are unarmored when they attempt to move silently, yes, by the rules, your Cleric is slightly better. I've thought of house ruling it where any class ability is made as if the ability score was Prime. But then I thought in a more real world way where the Cleric, for what ever reason really exercised his dexterous ability throughout his life, while the Ranger neglected it, and thus moving silently is not one of his better skills.

gideon_thorne · Post by **gideon_thorne** » Sat Sep 09, 2006 4:40 pm

vivsavage wrote:
Is this correct?

A 5th ranger with non-Prime 15 DEX has a lesser chance of succeeding on a move silently attempt than a 1st level cleric with a Prime Dex of 13? The ranger would need to beat an 18 (using a bonus of 5 levels + 1 DEX = 6), while the cleric would need to beat a 12 (with +1 DEX bonus and no level bonus). Thus the cleric has a slightly better chance of succeeding. I'm interpreting that as I read it in the rules. Obviously you could houserule this and say the cleric gets a penalty for not having skill like the ranger does.

Sure, but eventually the ranger is going to blow the doors off anyone but a certain elf racee variant. Some combos, superficially, seem to give an advantage, but in the long run the class is going to excell at what they do.

Quote:
Likewise, a low level PC with training/ability in something can have a lesser chance of success than someone of higher level who has no training in the same thing if the CK allows the non-trained character the bonus of adding in his levels?

Sure, the CK can allow adding of levels as they wish, but it's not the base method.

Also, it seems perhaps a bit odd to me that the ranger's prime attribute is STR, when his abilities are mostly ruled by WIS and DEX. All other classes seem consistent with regard to prime attributes and attribute test abilities.[/quote]

The Ranger is based off the fighter. Their primary task is the 'lone wolf' aspect of combat and sometimes being well in advance of the party. Their abilties are back up for their skill at fighting certain types of critters sometimes single handedly. Thats the rationale behind it. Think of an Army Ranger.
_________________
"We'll go out through the kitchen!" Tanis Half-Elven

Peter Bradley

angelius · Post by **angelius** » Sat Sep 09, 2006 5:10 pm

The ranger without Dex as a prime is more of a clutz than the cleric with Dex as a prime.

... let's say the Ranger isn't one for sneaking around, maybe he trips over stuff a lot???
_________________
Big Iron Vault Your friendly neighbourhood gaming magazine. Check out our new webcomic, The Heindrich Project!

JonusBlackthorn · Post by **JonusBlackthorn** » Sat Sep 09, 2006 5:27 pm

Also keep in mind that the ranger is completely silent while moving as there is still a chance the cleric could be heard. any character using the ability of another class is never going to be as good at it even if they have a better chance. Personally I would allow Wisdom checks for anyone the cleric is trying to sneak past while moving silently while the Ranger would sneak past without incident, as long as both their rolls succeeded that is.

Keith
_________________
Ignorance = lack of knowledge

Stupidity = Willful lack of knowledge

Ignorance is temporary, but stupidity...that's forever.

gideon_thorne · Post by **gideon_thorne** » Sat Sep 09, 2006 5:43 pm

angelius wrote:
The ranger without Dex as a prime is more of a clutz than the cleric with Dex as a prime.

*smiles* True, but the ranger will get better with experience, the cleric wont.

In an additional answer to the original querry, one must think in long term gains. In the short term, some combo's might give a bit of an edge, but in over all gain, the 'pro' is going to win out every time.
_________________
"We'll go out through the kitchen!" Tanis Half-Elven

Peter Bradley

angelius · Post by **angelius** » Sat Sep 09, 2006 6:57 pm

gideon_thorne wrote:
*smiles* True, but the ranger will get better with experience, the cleric wont.

In an additional answer to the original querry, one must think in long term gains. In the short term, some combo's might give a bit of an edge, but in over all gain, the 'pro' is going to win out every time.

Yeah the Ranger figures it out after a while... hehe

He starts out clutzy, then realizes that he has to put one foot in front of the other then put the other in front of that first foot...eventually he figures it out.

Just think of it as natural talent vs. tons of practice... I guess the TLG is trying to say that practice > natural talent!
_________________
Big Iron Vault Your friendly neighbourhood gaming magazine. Check out our new webcomic, The Heindrich Project!

Witterquick · Post by **Witterquick** » Sat Sep 09, 2006 11:32 pm

angelius wrote:
... let's say the Ranger isn't one for sneaking around, maybe he trips over stuff a lot???

Sort of like "Grizzly Adams."

_________________
http://strangequests.wordpress.com/

Moorcrys · Post by **Moorcrys** » Sun Sep 10, 2006 4:01 am

And again, as Jonus Blackthorn stated above, the ranger possesses the ability to move absolutely silently if he makes his roll. A cleric does not possess that skill, so the Prime Dex roll would allow the cleric to move quietly, armor and situation permitting, but not silently like a ranger could.

So there's a distinction between the two rolls for those classes and what success for each means.
_________________
----------------

Moorcrys

angelius · Post by **angelius** » Sun Sep 10, 2006 5:12 am

I think its all good, whatever you can "make up" to make the rules make sense to your PCs. That's how I play it at least. Takes a little getting used to but it is also the key factor in why I play C&C instead of 3rd ed.
_________________
Big Iron Vault Your friendly neighbourhood gaming magazine. Check out our new webcomic, The Heindrich Project!

moriarty777 · Post by **moriarty777** » Sun Sep 10, 2006 6:46 am

This reminds me of my conversation last night after game. Except it was with a different skill.

In this case... yes armor is a big factor... I was toying with the idea of houseruling something like a -5 penalty for a class trying to do another skill belonging to a different class.

Dunno... haven't *really* thought about it or the implications yet.

Welcome to the Crusade though!

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

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

Jason · Post by **Jason** » Sun Sep 10, 2006 8:18 am

Dristram wrote:
Keep in mind the armor. The Ranger can move silently if he's wearing the armor on his list, while the Cleric should suffer penalties from any armor he's wearing. Even leather armor as it will be restrictive enough to cause at least some balance issues while trying to keep silent while moving.

No it won't. What makes you think that?

babbage · Post by **babbage** » Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:02 am

You could of course allow a choice of prime for the ranger - say one of str, dex, wis. That way, the player is deciding what style of ranger he wants to play.

It is true though, that practice over time will always win out over natural ability and no practice.
_________________
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.

- Benjamin Franklin

Arioch · Post by **Arioch** » Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:20 am

Yes you have it right.

ken
_________________
Gygax is to Gaming what Kirby was to comics

Alas poor Elric I was a thousand times more evil than you

Slice N Dice: Game and Pizza Parlour

WWBYD What would Brigham Young do ?
http://www.geocities.com/J_Elric_Smith/Index.html

BASH MAN · Post by **BASH MAN** » Sun Sep 10, 2006 6:27 pm

Change the Ranger's Prime from STR to DEX. It instantly solves the problem.

Another easy house-rule, is your class abilities are ALWAYS considered prime, even if for saves, etc, they are not. Example- Ranger does not have dex prime, still only has to get a 12 move silently, but his default to pick pockets, etc, is terrible... You should always be better at your CLASS abilities than people who don't even have them. Come to think of it, this actually makes 12/18 livable, without having to tweek it a lot.

Previously, I had been doing some heavy house-ruling-- All class abilities were TN 15, and primes only mattered for saves... Now I think I can use the siege engine as written, with only one caveat-- class abilities are always as if prime... I like it!

No more arguments by players that elven rangers don't exist or that only humans can be successful rogues! If you let class abilities always be prime, it gives players the freedom to pick whatever race/primes they want without worrying about "ruining" their character. It also frees the CK to assign "racial" primes without ruining the PCs characters or making everyone play Humans for sheer survival.

It is the return of the Charismatic Rogue and the Intelligent ranger! Huzzah! It is the return of my beloved Racial Primes [Half-Orc STR, Halfling Dex, Dwarf Con, Gnome Int, Half-Elf Wis, Elf Cha, humans any 2]. It shall be a return of fun to C&C without endless argument! Huzzah, the promised rules caveat that is supereasy to impliment without causing people's brains to explode has arrived!
_________________
Basic Action Games http://www.bashrpg.com

Check us out for free demos and downloads or visit us onFacebook.

babbage · Post by **babbage** » Sun Sep 10, 2006 7:08 pm

BASH MAN wrote:
It is the return of the Charismatic Rogue and the Intelligent ranger! Huzzah! It is the return of my beloved Racial Primes [Half-Orc STR, Halfling Dex, Dwarf Con, Gnome Int, Half-Elf Wis, Elf Cha, humans any 2]. It shall be a return of fun to C&C without endless argument! Huzzah, the promised rules caveat that is supereasy to impliment without causing people's brains to explode has arrived!

I'll have a pint of whatever he's on please! 8)
_________________
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.

- Benjamin Franklin

gideon_thorne · Post by **gideon_thorne** » Sun Sep 10, 2006 7:29 pm

babbage wrote:
I'll have a pint of whatever he's on please! 8)

*chuckles* Me too.

What, with the write up of Gary's CZ background skills, some of which emulate class abilties, the seige engine requires no tweaking at all.

Just a bit of patience on the part of players who can focus on improvement of a non prime ability, bought as a skill, instead of tweaking a rule at all.
_________________
"We'll go out through the kitchen!" Tanis Half-Elven

Peter Bradley

Treebore · Post by **Treebore** » Sun Sep 10, 2006 8:16 pm

BASH MAN wrote:
Change the Ranger's Prime from STR to DEX. It instantly solves the problem.

Another easy house-rule, is your class abilities are ALWAYS considered prime, even if for saves, etc, they are not. Example- Ranger does not have dex prime, still only has to get a 12 move silently, but his default to pick pockets, etc, is terrible... You should always be better at your CLASS abilities than people who don't even have them. Come to think of it, this actually makes 12/18 livable, without having to tweek it a lot.

Previously, I had been doing some heavy house-ruling-- All class abilities were TN 15, and primes only mattered for saves... Now I think I can use the siege engine as written, with only one caveat-- class abilities are always as if prime... I like it!

No more arguments by players that elven rangers don't exist or that only humans can be successful rogues! If you let class abilities always be prime, it gives players the freedom to pick whatever race/primes they want without worrying about "ruining" their character. It also frees the CK to assign "racial" primes without ruining the PCs characters or making everyone play Humans for sheer survival.

It is the return of the Charismatic Rogue and the Intelligent ranger! Huzzah! It is the return of my beloved Racial Primes [Half-Orc STR, Halfling Dex, Dwarf Con, Gnome Int, Half-Elf Wis, Elf Cha, humans any 2]. It shall be a return of fun to C&C without endless argument! Huzzah, the promised rules caveat that is supereasy to impliment without causing people's brains to explode has arrived!

That is exactly how I do it. It came so "naturally" I hadn't even realized I had changed the actual rules for weeks, maybe even a couple of months.

PeelSeel2 · Post by **PeelSeel2** » Sun Sep 10, 2006 8:39 pm

That is a great house rule.
_________________
Labor to keep alive in your breast that little spark of celestial fire called conscience.

-George Washington

Emryys · Post by **Emryys** » Sun Sep 10, 2006 11:22 pm

PeelSeel2 wrote:
That is a great house rule.

Agreed! ... *Snip*

Thanks
_________________

Geron Raveneye · Post by **Geron Raveneye** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 8:29 am

BASH MAN wrote:
Change the Ranger's Prime from STR to DEX. It instantly solves the problem.

Bingo, sounds like the most sensible and easy solution. and since Ranger comes before Rogue anyway, alphabetically speaking, we can even pretend that the Ranger was supposed to start the section of Dexterity-based classes, and that the (Strength) beside the class name was a typo or misprint.
Funny sidenote, C&C seems to have unofficial subclasses...Assassin follows the Rogue, Illusionist follows the Wizard, even though in both cases, it should be the other way around if you go alphabetically.

Dristram · Post by **Dristram** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 11:19 pm

Jason wrote:
No it won't. What makes you think that?

From seeing and wearing armor made from leather. It's bulky in order to provide effective protection. Contrary to popular belief, actual leather armor is not soft, light, and thin. It's a bit more like plate armor made from leather instead of metal.

Now, if you want to talk fantasy armor, a leather bodice is leather armor for a female thief and a chainmail bikini is chainmail for a female fighter. And I may argue that moving silently with those armors might not be hampering.

Dristram · Post by **Dristram** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 11:35 pm

It is a great house rule. But before I adopt house rules, I want to know why it was done the way it was done in the first place. Sometimes I then understand why it was done and agree and don't houserule it. And other times, I don't agree and freely houserule it.

So, can anyone answer why Strength was chosen for the Ranger instead of Dex? And can anyone answer why class abilities are not based off of Prime?

moriarty777 · Post by **moriarty777** » Tue Sep 12, 2006 12:10 am

That's a good question. At first appearances, it looks like they tried to spread the classes evenly among the Attributes... Of course with thirteen classes, you have one Attribute with three classes. Those being the Paladin, Knight, and Bard with Charisma.

Maybe that idea ultimately over-ruled assigned Dex as the associated prime for Rangers. If I'm making a Ranger, thought, I'd be naturally tempted to put the other prime (or one of the other primes if human) to Strength, but that's just me without a clear and developed character concept.

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

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

Mac Golden · Post by **Mac Golden** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 4:56 pm

1. By the rules, the cleric does not have the ability to move silently and would have zero chance of success (as would any other character without move silently). If you allow the optional rule that the cleric can attempt it, then the cleric would not get to add his level bonus.

2. The Ranger is a STR class b/c his purpose is to combat, generally on a small group basis, one-on-one, against marauders, etc....

3. Don't forget that each character has at least two primes. So, a human ranger could designate his additional primes in Dex and Wis and then be "covered" for his class abilities. This is the advantage of playing a human ranger over a demi-human, who only gets two primes.

- Mac Golden

vivsavage · Post by **vivsavage** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 5:03 pm

Mac Golden wrote:
2. The Ranger is a STR class b/c his purpose is to combat, generally on a small group basis, one-on-one, against marauders, etc....

That's assuming his primary focus is melee. I've always seen the ranger as a bowman or spear thrower for some reason. Given that (I think) most people picture rangers as using bows (amongst other things), and that so many of his class abilities are ruled by DEX, I think that DEX would have been a better fit.

Mac Golden wrote:
3. Don't forget that each character has at least two primes. So, a human ranger could designate his additional primes in Dex and Wis and then be "covered" for his class abilities. This is the advantage of playing a human ranger over a demi-human, who only gets two primes.

Very true... it just seems very odd to me that you can easily have a PC with a special class ability that is ruled by an attribute that is non-prime. I've already decided to change the prime rules to make all class attribute tests prime.

Troll Lord Games

Do I understand this rule correctly?

Do I understand this rule correctly?

Re: Do I understand this rule correctly?

3 things

Re: 3 things