Quote from: Jaeger on January 18, 2023, 07:34:15 PM
Yet somehow wotzi has not been lawfared.

You seem to be confused. That nobody has sued WotC is irrelevant. Nobody has the money to win.

Quote from: Teodrik on January 19, 2023, 02:08:56 AM
Secondly I referred to the perceptive cleric problem. Spot checks, like looking for stuff or roll for surprise, is a wisdom based SIEGE check. Since wisdom is a prime attribute for clerics they roll against target number 12 instead of 18, and add their stat modifier to the roll. This generally make the cleric a very good spotter in the group by default. And maybe even better than the thief (depending on if he picked wisdom as a prime or not) in the early-to-mid levels. The whole prime and not-prime mechanic often leads to this kinds of weird results regarding class abilities and general abilities.

Personally I always disliked using wisdom as a measurement for perception. In TSR D&D you could just add in a perception stat/ ability, done no problem. In SIEGE that would be a huge change because of how the six classic attributes are  balanced and connected to class abilities, saving throws and general skill checks in the engine.

Compare/contrast with D&D 3.X; the same issue is present. And to "fix" this, simply make the ability a non-prime for "spot" checks, or whatever you're trying to do. There is no specific WIS check outlined beyond what the GM decides to give one for; this is one of those 3.X-isms held over to C&C that doesn't really exist beyond "this is how we always did it". You can change this as needed.

The math is broken in so far as someone simply decides to just roll dice instead of applying some logical thinking. And if you hate WIS being tied to perception, change it to whatever you want. Have it tied to no attribute, or don't use it whatsoever. It's not a HUGE change, it's simply a change made to run the game how you want. Literal LOL @ balance...this is non-existent in any form of D&D.

When it first came out I did a lot with C&C. I also wrote some stuff for it (there's a Netbook of Classes still available in the Dragonsfoot resources. I also based several rpgs off the system - Go Fer Yer Gun! Medieval Mysteries and Tombs & Terrors. All heavily modified, of course. Haven't played C&C for a while, so I think I'll check it out again.

Quote from: Teodrik on January 19, 2023, 02:08:56 AM

Quote from: Brad on January 18, 2023, 03:23:07 PM

Quote from: Teodrik on January 18, 2023, 03:05:24 PM
I really want to like C&C. But just seems like a game I would just endlessly try to tinker with and never be satisfied. The base math is a well known problem. Has anyone actually adressed and fixed the perceptive cleric problem? And no "just trust the procedure in th rules man" doesn't cut it. It's just too bonkers. Add a Perception stat? Clashes with the whole structure of the system. Everytime I find myself tinkering with the SIEGE to fix something, I realize I am really just building a new game.

So I put it down, stop shaking my fist at the clouds, pick upp BECMI+ adding in the AD&D classes and call it a day.

Not really sure what you're referring to here. Can you give an example?

The math problems of higher levels in the SIEGE system is quite well known. Often making non-prime attribute saving throws almost impossible or near impossible against spellcaster of higher level. This is as of why many people changes target numbers for primes and non-prime checks.

Secondly I referred to the perceptive cleric problem. Spot checks, like looking for stuff or roll for surprise, is a wisdom based SIEGE check. Since wisdom is a prime attribute for clerics they roll against target number 12 instead of 18, and add their stat modifier to the roll. This generally make the cleric a very good spotter in the group by default. And maybe even better than the thief (depending on if he picked wisdom as a prime or not) in the early-to-mid levels. The whole prime and not-prime mechanic often leads to this kinds of weird results regarding class abilities and general abilities.

Personally I always disliked using wisdom as a measurement for perception. In TSR D&D you could just add in a perception stat/ ability, done no problem. In SIEGE that would be a huge change because of how the six classic attributes are  balanced and connected to class abilities, saving throws and general skill checks in the engine.

Here's how we do "Perception" checks in our group:

A perception check is called for during circumstances when the characters may notice something out of the ordinary. It doesn't replace any kind of search check covered by another race or class ability.
Check: 1d20+Perception Score vs 15
Perception Score:
a. The average (round down) of the bonuses from "mental" attributes.
b. If a character has any "mental" attribute as prime they gain a +1 to the check.
c. Races that gain a bonus to Listen checks gain that same bonus to perception checks (elf +2, gnome +3, etc)
d. Ranger, rogue, assassin, barbarian, illusionist, druid, skald, and bard classes gain a +1 to their check.

Quote from: Teodrik on January 19, 2023, 02:08:56 AM

Quote from: Brad on January 18, 2023, 03:23:07 PM

Quote from: Teodrik on January 18, 2023, 03:05:24 PM
I really want to like C&C. But just seems like a game I would just endlessly try to tinker with and never be satisfied. The base math is a well known problem. Has anyone actually adressed and fixed the perceptive cleric problem? And no "just trust the procedure in th rules man" doesn't cut it. It's just too bonkers. Add a Perception stat? Clashes with the whole structure of the system. Everytime I find myself tinkering with the SIEGE to fix something, I realize I am really just building a new game.

So I put it down, stop shaking my fist at the clouds, pick upp BECMI+ adding in the AD&D classes and call it a day.

Not really sure what you're referring to here. Can you give an example?

The math problems of higher levels in the SIEGE system is quite well known. Often making non-prime attribute saving throws almost impossible or near impossible against spellcaster of higher level. This is as of why many people changes target numbers for primes and non-prime checks.

Secondly I referred to the perceptive cleric problem. Spot checks, like looking for stuff or roll for surprise, is a wisdom based SIEGE check. Since wisdom is a prime attribute for clerics they roll against target number 12 instead of 18, and add their stat modifier to the roll. This generally make the cleric a very good spotter in the group by default. And maybe even better than the thief (depending on if he picked wisdom as a prime or not) in the early-to-mid levels. The whole prime and not-prime mechanic often leads to this kinds of weird results regarding class abilities and general abilities.

Personally I always disliked using wisdom as a measurement for perception. In TSR D&D you could just add in a perception stat/ ability, done no problem. In SIEGE that would be a huge change because of how the six classic attributes are  balanced and connected to class abilities, saving throws and general skill checks in the engine.

I just don't use perception/spot checks in the manner they started doing in later, inferior editions of D&D.  Always hated those in fact.  Tell me what you're looking at/for and I'll tell you if you see something.  I detest that "I rolled my spot check and it was 20" or whatever.  To me, that's turning roleplaying into roll playing. 

As for Siege Engine math, it definitely makes things scale differently than standard D&D.  It's more like MERP/Rolemaster in that respect, which I kind of like.  Because we tend to just use common sense I haven't encountered the class-based issues some people seem to have with the primes and how they affect certain actions because I try to limit the rolling unless it's absolutely necessary.  Players aren't constantly rolling perception checks, for example.

And I still think the old school roll under your ability score on a d20 is the most elegant way to handle most situations, hence my appreciation for Swords & Wizardry, which we also enjoy quite a bit.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic on January 19, 2023, 04:29:00 AM
I love the work they did on the DMing side of things -- it's like AD&D with how much coverage there is. But on the player side, it feels a bit underwhelming... there's basically no abilities or choices. I'm used to 5e...

That's because you're not familiar with having actual freedom of choice and exercising your own creativity; you rely on the illusion of choice seemingly offered by the generic examples placed before you by the mind control squad at WOTC.  There are plenty of class abilities and these are pretty much what you got in 1-2e, with some interesting tweaks, especially to the races.  And you customize through your choice of primes, weapons, spells, etc.  Your archer could be an elf like Legolas or a Mongol type horseman.  Your bard could be the classic fop, the aging dwarf loremaster, the naked Celtic skald, or the Bedouin type out of the desert, with or without magic.   They add a ton of historically-derived classes in the various Codices,including Roman gladiators and Eastern European vampire hunters.

You have to remember in the parlance of the old TSR, these are "products of your imagination."  If you want to add a few extra special abilities from your favorite system, go ahead.  But, as I know from personal experience having previously played with a group that bounced around in editions, all those feats and skills tend to slow things down and doesn't add anything you can't come up with on your own. 

We used to joke that the youngest player in our group, who started with 3e, who was just obsessed with all the clutter on his character sheet, spent more time trying to shoehorn his feats and skills into the game than actually playing and problem solving.  It was like "I have a bonus against rear attacks in semi-darkness on the second Thursday of the month when they're initiated by a midget.  How can I manufacture that situation in the game?"

Quote from: Mithgarthr on January 18, 2023, 03:11:05 PM

Much faster, especially combat. No feats/skills/powers bogging shit down, orcs don't have 46,000 hit points.

I've only ran it once since learning the rules, but it was for my kids over the weekend and they grokked it just fine. Tomorrow night's the first "real" session with one of my groups, so I'll know more after that, but from the little play I've had with it, it played great.

Great information.  I am liking what I am reading and I really like the idea of faster combat.

Quote from: Sacrificial Lamb on January 18, 2023, 04:31:23 PM

I prefer to use the term, "Derp Evil".

Yes I misspoke.  I meant Derp Evil 

Given the big push to get away from 5E this past week I would not have picked Castles And Crusades as one of the top contenders.

It seems like a good game, but so do a lot of others. 

My games to pick from are these. 

1.  Dragon Warriors.  It's got a different way of handling armor (saving throw), and uses magic points instead of amnesia for wizards.  And Fighters are not a thing.  Your basic warrior is a Knight, with GM options to rename it as Samurai, Huscarl, or whatever you like. 

2.  Any of the dozens of OSR games.  C&C is just one of those.

3.  Shadow of the Demon Lord.  Lots of character building options since you pick three classes over time instead of one at the start. 

Castles and Crusades might be ahead of the pack in the OSR because it's not using any OGL, thus it's "clean" right now.  But so are a lot of games.  Both Dragon Warriors and Shadow of the Demon Lord are also clear of any OGL stuff. 

I have to hand it to WotC to have a large chunk of gaming suddenly feel contaminated and verboten. 

Me, I'm sticking to my rules lite stuff.  It's still fun, and OGL or not I already own the books

Quote from: migo on January 19, 2023, 04:32:33 AM
...
You seem to be confused. That nobody has sued WotC is irrelevant. Nobody has the money to win.

This is the exact same reason why minor system differences will not save the D&D clones that these smaller game companies are making if Wotzi decides to lawfare them.

I acknowledge that particular individual trees are there. But I'm also looking at the whole forest.

Citing small system differences in a D&D clone like it's some kind of helpful argument, when the game company can't afford to fight back against the lawfare anyway, is just trying to invoke some forlorn hope.

Those system differences also mean nothing when they also use vancian casting, which is 100% D&D through and through.

That being said; Nobody knows exactly how full-retard Wotzi is going to go. Or if companies are going to band together, or if Baizuo will foot the bill, and be the front man.

Nobody knows anything right now.

Quote from: weirdguy564 on January 19, 2023, 10:17:01 AM


Castles and Crusades might be ahead of the pack in the OSR because it's not using any OGL, thus it's "clean" right now. 

It isn't. They've been copy and pasting (with mistakes) since 2004. They almost certainly have SRD content that requires the OGL right now.

Castles & Crusades doesn't need to have it, but they would have to do a new printing with significant editing, and would really need to hire someone outside to do it for them, because I doubt they have the competence to clean it properly.

Their focus on mythology means they could take out the spells they need to, replace them with some more mythological ones, and also change the content of Monsters & Treasure to fit that mythological focus. The game would be the same, have full compatibility, but a slightly different tone.

They are currently working on removing anything that would be potentiall problematic with the whole OGL situation. They have their Twitch stream starting here in about 20 min (I don't think I can make all of this one) where they'll talk more about it, I'm sure.

Bought the 1st or 2nd printing books many moons ago and played a few games online.  Liked it for the similarity to 3e mechanics but none of the feats/etc. to clutter up things.  In lieu of the massive tomes in the 3e era, the C&C books were a breath of fresh air, for me, in just being so danged "light," and trimmed of fluff.  Plus, no dungeonpunk aesthetic that I could see, iirc.

Glad to see them still kicking.

Quote from: Danger on January 19, 2023, 07:28:12 PM
Plus, no dungeonpunk aesthetic that I could see, iirc.

They lasted 7 printings of the PHB. As of the 8th printing they're starting to lean that way.

Quote from: migo on January 19, 2023, 07:53:20 PM
They lasted 7 printings of the PHB. As of the 8th printing they're starting to lean that way.

Goddammit.