Characters using other class abilities
- Go0gleplex
- Greater Lore Drake
- Posts: 4051
- Joined: Fri May 30, 2008 7:00 am
- Location: Keizer, OR
Re: Characters using other class abilities
The other problem with using your reference material is that it is the Player's GUIDE to Airdhe and for 5e. Keyword here being GUIDE. It is NOT the Player's Handbook equivalent merely a reference book to facilitate play in Airdhe in a 5e game...and an Appendix at that meaning it is simply a reference/option and, as FIzz pointed out, is meant to provide a bridge, shaky as it is, between the SIEGE Engine and 5e mechanics. You're comparing apples and oranges in an effort to make lemonade Pally.
Now...as someone whom has actually discussed things with Steve, Davis, and a few other folks involved in the game while Serl still hosted the chatroom back 12-15 years ago, I'm simply going to state that Fizz is far more correct than you are. I almost wish Treebore was still around...this thread would get really amusing as he was there from the beginning with the Trolls and when irritated, as he would likely be by all of this...and wouldn't be polite correcting your erroneous assumptions.
Now...as someone whom has actually discussed things with Steve, Davis, and a few other folks involved in the game while Serl still hosted the chatroom back 12-15 years ago, I'm simply going to state that Fizz is far more correct than you are. I almost wish Treebore was still around...this thread would get really amusing as he was there from the beginning with the Trolls and when irritated, as he would likely be by all of this...and wouldn't be polite correcting your erroneous assumptions.
"Rolling dice and killing characters since September 1976."
"Author of Wardogs! and Contributor to Iron Stars and Starmada-Admiralty ed."
"Certified crazy since 2009."
"Author of Wardogs! and Contributor to Iron Stars and Starmada-Admiralty ed."
"Certified crazy since 2009."
Re: Characters using other class abilities
Again, and for the last time, this is All optional. By your own admission, you have not read the book; and you are interpreting what's there in light of your personal preference. C&C is very tinkerable; and you have said you have plenty of houserules of your own. But on this, it's "your way or the highway." If someone isn't a purist on this, well, they obviously aren't playing C&C!
If the Trolls made allowance for this, even if it's for "5e-people", then it's a valid expression of C&C. The fact is, they allow for "skills that mimic class abilities." Your steadfast rejection of even the possibility means that you think you know the game better than those who published it.
This seems akin to the attitude of some who play OD&D, who play with Only the LBB's, and disparage anyone who uses the Supplements. And then they tack on their Own houserules.
I suggest we agree to disagree on this, and just enjoy Our game.
Peace!
If the Trolls made allowance for this, even if it's for "5e-people", then it's a valid expression of C&C. The fact is, they allow for "skills that mimic class abilities." Your steadfast rejection of even the possibility means that you think you know the game better than those who published it.
This seems akin to the attitude of some who play OD&D, who play with Only the LBB's, and disparage anyone who uses the Supplements. And then they tack on their Own houserules.
I suggest we agree to disagree on this, and just enjoy Our game.
Peace!
Re: Characters using other class abilities
And again you're mischaracterizing. I never said such a thing.
And i've told you want the ramifications of those are. Why play a thief/rogue if i can play a fighter, take a 5e skill or two, and be able to do nearly everything that a thief could do? That's the diminishment of which i speak.If the Trolls made allowance for this, even if it's for "5e-people", then it's a valid expression of C&C. The fact is, they allow for "skills that mimic class abilities."
See Go0gleplex's previous reply. It's not me stating this- it's the Trolls.Your steadfast rejection of even the possibility means that you think you know the game better than those who published it.
-Fizz
Re: Characters using other class abilities
Nope. Valid expressions of game rules are made in the core rules of said games when the makers of C&C are doing it. Not in a world specific rule set addressing people who play a different game. Ask the Trolls if you continue to be confused.
Re: Characters using other class abilities
Re: Characters using other class abilities
A little admin note, to say I've been watching this thread closely. It's been quite polite and respectful, so far, and I applaud you all for that.
However, I can see it getting near to tilting on a knife-edge, so please tread careful or I'll have to lock the thread down.
Thanks, all!
However, I can see it getting near to tilting on a knife-edge, so please tread careful or I'll have to lock the thread down.
Thanks, all!
Re: Characters using other class abilities
I've reached out to the Trolls about this a few ways. No response yet. If anyone had a more direct line to them, please let me know.Bifford wrote: ↑Thu Mar 30, 2023 5:03 pmA little admin note, to say I've been watching this thread closely. It's been quite polite and respectful, so far, and I applaud you all for that.
However, I can see it getting near to tilting on a knife-edge, so please tread careful or I'll have to lock the thread down.
Thanks, all!
Re: Characters using other class abilities
The text of the book clearly states the intent: to allow 5e concepts within C&C. Whichever direction you're approaching it (5e to C&C or vice versa), the result is the same: allowing "feats" and skills within C&C. "Feats"/advantages were already allowed as per the CKG. This adds a Very limited skill system, that never rises to the level of class abilities, as per the text.Go0gleplex wrote: ↑Thu Mar 30, 2023 1:52 pmThe other problem with using your reference material is that it is the Player's GUIDE to Airdhe and for 5e. Keyword here being GUIDE. It is NOT the Player's Handbook equivalent merely a reference book to facilitate play in Airdhe in a 5e game...and an Appendix at that meaning it is simply a reference/option and, as FIzz pointed out, is meant to provide a bridge, shaky as it is, between the SIEGE Engine and 5e mechanics. You're comparing apples and oranges in an effort to make lemonade Pally.
Now...as someone whom has actually discussed things with Steve, Davis, and a few other folks involved in the game while Serl still hosted the chatroom back 12-15 years ago, I'm simply going to state that Fizz is far more correct than you are. I almost wish Treebore was still around...this thread would get really amusing as he was there from the beginning with the Trolls and when irritated, as he would likely be by all of this...and wouldn't be polite correcting your erroneous assumptions.
I am well aware that it's all OPTIONAL. But someone with the Trolls decided that it would be good to allow that sort of flexibility. I happen to like it; others (obviously) don't. That's your prerogative. Just like the CKG added OPTIONS, so does the PGA.
And the PGA is a lot more recent than 15 years ago. The Trolls obviously thought it important to add the OPTION to have skills, and a guideline for IF a skill "mimics a class ability." I happen to like the flexibility.
Re: Characters using other class abilities
There is a fundamental difference between an optional rule that makes use of the SIEGE engine, and one that is imported from an entirely different ruleset.
It's like playing baseball, adding field goals from american football, and then claiming that you're still playing baseball because field goals are in the football rulebook. Huh?
Let me ask you this- do you let other classes use Back Attack? After all, anyone can attack from behind, and it's not magical or divinely given. So do you let your fighters get a damage multiple if they can surprise the opponent from behind?
If you say "no", then what's the difference between Back Attack and other thief abilities? You'd be inconsistent in your rulings.
If you say "yes", then you're reinforcing that thieves/rogues are pointless, because there is nothing they do that someone else can't.
I have said consistently that i am standing up for ability-based classes, thieves in particular. So why should i play a C&C thief if i can play a fighter with two 5e skills that cover nearly everything the C&C thief can do?
-Fizz
If the Trolls had thought it important to permit intrusive skills as a general tenet, then why is it not mentioned in the C&C version of PGA? Why does the PH say the exact opposite?The text of the book clearly states the intent: to allow 5e concepts within C&C.
It's like playing baseball, adding field goals from american football, and then claiming that you're still playing baseball because field goals are in the football rulebook. Huh?
The advantages and skills from the CKG do not trample over class abilities. Nothing in the CKG makes thief abilities less important. Everything in the CKG is an add-on, not a replacement of the core tenets of the game."Feats"/advantages were already allowed as per the CKG.
Let me ask you this- do you let other classes use Back Attack? After all, anyone can attack from behind, and it's not magical or divinely given. So do you let your fighters get a damage multiple if they can surprise the opponent from behind?
If you say "no", then what's the difference between Back Attack and other thief abilities? You'd be inconsistent in your rulings.
If you say "yes", then you're reinforcing that thieves/rogues are pointless, because there is nothing they do that someone else can't.
I have said consistently that i am standing up for ability-based classes, thieves in particular. So why should i play a C&C thief if i can play a fighter with two 5e skills that cover nearly everything the C&C thief can do?
-Fizz
Re: Characters using other class abilities
Ooops... accidentally duplicated...
Re: Characters using other class abilities
This is from the Trolls:
Boom. Case closed.Michael,
Hey and how goes it? Thank you for the email and the age old discussion of applying non class abilities. The game is designed, as you know, to be malleable to everyone's table and style of play. In the PHB you are strongly discouraged from allowing classes from performing non class abilities. However, under the section "Adding Character Classes to levels" (page 211 of the most current printing, 8+), you'll see a suggested way of handling it, which is much as you read in the 5th Edition Player Guide to Aihrde.
Thank you for reaching out and no matter what play C&C in the manner in which you want to play it!
Trollzah!
Re: Characters using other class abilities
Actually, this doesn't say anything new. We already knew that the PH says no to non-class abilities in general, and the PH has always had rules for dealing when an attempt intrudes on another class (don't add level, both in PH and pga5e). The question is- does the new printing say that classes can do non-class abilities with equal level of competence as the emulated class? For instance, quiet vs silent, tree vs impossible sheer cliff, etc.paladinn wrote: ↑Fri Mar 31, 2023 4:07 pmThis is from the Trolls:Boom. Case closed.Michael,
Hey and how goes it? Thank you for the email and the age old discussion of applying non class abilities. The game is designed, as you know, to be malleable to everyone's table and style of play. In the PHB you are strongly discouraged from allowing classes from performing non class abilities. However, under the section "Adding Character Classes to levels" (page 211 of the most current printing, 8+), you'll see a suggested way of handling it, which is much as you read in the 5th Edition Player Guide to Aihrde.
Thank you for reaching out and no matter what play C&C in the manner in which you want to play it!
Trollzah!
-Fizz
Re: Characters using other class abilities
Let's see what happens with this 5e rule added... consider a low level party that finds itself cornered by a hoard of goblins.
Thief: "I'll climb down this cliff and see if there is an escape route that way."
Fighter: "I already did it. i have 5e Athletics, and Str 18 prime, so i will do all the climbing tasks until you're 12th level."
Thief: "Awww... ok then i'll listen at the door so we know when the goblins start their assault."
Figher" "Actually, we've got the cleric listening at the door. He has 5e perception, and better Wisdom, so he'll be our listener until you're 11th level."
Thief: "Awww, ok then i'll hide in shadows so we can flank the goblins when they break through."
Fighter: "The ranger is hidden there, because she has 5e Stealth, and her Dex is similar to yours, so she'll be our sneaky-flanker until you get to 7th level."
Thief: "Awww... ok, then i'll check the value of that artifact."
Fighter: "The wizard already did that. he has 5e arcana, and his intelligence is better than yours, so he'll be our appraiser."
Thief: "Awww... ok, then when the hoard of goblins break through, i'll use my Combat Dominance on them."
Fighter: "You can't, you're a thief."
Thief: "Awww... then can i hold your beer?"
Fighter: "Sure."
Yes, it's your game and no one is going to come to your door and arrest you for "playing wrong". It's our perogative to point out how such a change adversely affects the game, just as it's your perogative to ruin the thief/rogue in your game.
-Fizz
Thief: "I'll climb down this cliff and see if there is an escape route that way."
Fighter: "I already did it. i have 5e Athletics, and Str 18 prime, so i will do all the climbing tasks until you're 12th level."
Thief: "Awww... ok then i'll listen at the door so we know when the goblins start their assault."
Figher" "Actually, we've got the cleric listening at the door. He has 5e perception, and better Wisdom, so he'll be our listener until you're 11th level."
Thief: "Awww, ok then i'll hide in shadows so we can flank the goblins when they break through."
Fighter: "The ranger is hidden there, because she has 5e Stealth, and her Dex is similar to yours, so she'll be our sneaky-flanker until you get to 7th level."
Thief: "Awww... ok, then i'll check the value of that artifact."
Fighter: "The wizard already did that. he has 5e arcana, and his intelligence is better than yours, so he'll be our appraiser."
Thief: "Awww... ok, then when the hoard of goblins break through, i'll use my Combat Dominance on them."
Fighter: "You can't, you're a thief."
Thief: "Awww... then can i hold your beer?"
Fighter: "Sure."
Yes, it's your game and no one is going to come to your door and arrest you for "playing wrong". It's our perogative to point out how such a change adversely affects the game, just as it's your perogative to ruin the thief/rogue in your game.
-Fizz
- Go0gleplex
- Greater Lore Drake
- Posts: 4051
- Joined: Fri May 30, 2008 7:00 am
- Location: Keizer, OR
Re: Characters using other class abilities
Having been the Grand Master of the Knights of the Crusade, having many conversations with Chuck, Tim, and Steve (and Davis when he was around on occasion) you'd think I might have a clue or two on the Troll's feelings on things. Tim especially got to listen to me grouse about 5e being prioritized for a while. Now, while contacting the Trolls isn't difficult, expecting a response is a whole 'nother kettle of gnomes. Good luck there...or tune in on their Discord channel. Last I heard some of the Trolls hung out from time to time.
Steve has said repeatedly over the years that "The only books really needed to play are the PHB and M&T. The rest are simply options that can be folded into your game."
That said, any reference to any other book beyond those two is officially, per the head Troll hisself, OPTIONAL and not a core rule. You can attempt to justify, rationalize, and quibble about 'well this book has this rule in it' until the sun implodes...but the hard line set by the Trolls is as Steve stated and has repeated to state. This has all been amusing and all...but I'm done watching the dead horse being minced and its hairs split.
Fizz...nice analogy there.
Steve has said repeatedly over the years that "The only books really needed to play are the PHB and M&T. The rest are simply options that can be folded into your game."
That said, any reference to any other book beyond those two is officially, per the head Troll hisself, OPTIONAL and not a core rule. You can attempt to justify, rationalize, and quibble about 'well this book has this rule in it' until the sun implodes...but the hard line set by the Trolls is as Steve stated and has repeated to state. This has all been amusing and all...but I'm done watching the dead horse being minced and its hairs split.
Fizz...nice analogy there.
"Rolling dice and killing characters since September 1976."
"Author of Wardogs! and Contributor to Iron Stars and Starmada-Admiralty ed."
"Certified crazy since 2009."
"Author of Wardogs! and Contributor to Iron Stars and Starmada-Admiralty ed."
"Certified crazy since 2009."
Re: Characters using other class abilities
They said it was "as you read in the 5th Edition Player Guide to Aihdre." I don't have the 8th printing yet, but that's pretty clear to me:Fizz wrote: ↑Fri Mar 31, 2023 4:21 pmActually, this doesn't say anything new. We already knew that the PH says no to non-class abilities in general, and the PH has always had rules for dealing when an attempt intrudes on another class (don't add level, both in PH and pga5e). The question is- does the new printing say that classes can do non-class abilities with equal level of competence as the emulated class? For instance, quiet vs silent, tree vs impossible sheer cliff, etc.paladinn wrote: ↑Fri Mar 31, 2023 4:07 pmThis is from the Trolls:Boom. Case closed.Michael,
Hey and how goes it? Thank you for the email and the age old discussion of applying non class abilities. The game is designed, as you know, to be malleable to everyone's table and style of play. In the PHB you are strongly discouraged from allowing classes from performing non class abilities. However, under the section "Adding Character Classes to levels" (page 211 of the most current printing, 8+), you'll see a suggested way of handling it, which is much as you read in the 5th Edition Player Guide to Aihrde.
Thank you for reaching out and no matter what play C&C in the manner in which you want to play it!
Trollzah!
-Fizz
So according to PGA, at L1 a fighter can take, say, tracking as a skill. The fighter gets a +2 to Siege checks, but cannot add his/her level. By L20, the fighter could have a max +6 in tracking. At no point except Maybe L1 can the fighter track as well as a ranger. And if the skill isn't allowed till L2, the fighter Never exceeds the ranger. Not by a long shot. I'd say the same for rogue skills as well.If a skill mimics a class ability, it provides the skill bonus, but the PC doesn’t get to add their level, unless they’re a member of the class with the ability
Based on the PGA (and I supposed the 8th printing), this is completely allowable in C&C. This is exactly what I've been saying all along. If you guys don't want to allow it, by all means, don't.
Re: Characters using other class abilities
Actually, it says "much as you read", which means it is not identical. My guess is the person who replied to you is only referring to the adding of levels. I'd be shocked if it's anything otherwise.
But you have to consider the effect of primes. That's an effective +6. Tracking is generally less of an intrusion on the ranger because most fighters are usually not Wis prime and usually don't have high Wis scores. But if you made a high Wis-prime fighter, then you've got at least a half-ranger.So according to PGA, at L1 a fighter can take, say, tracking as a skill. The fighter gets a +2 to Siege checks, but cannot add his/her level. By L20, the fighter could have a max +6 in tracking. At no point except Maybe L1 can the fighter track as well as a ranger. And if the skill isn't allowed till L2, the fighter Never exceeds the ranger. Not by a long shot. I'd say the same for rogue skills as well.If a skill mimics a class ability, it provides the skill bonus, but the PC doesn’t get to add their level, unless they’re a member of the class with the ability
Further, the 5e skill is not "Tracking". The 5e skill is "Survival", which includes tracking, hunting, foraging, pathfinding, etc. So that one 5e skill gets you multiple C&C ranger abilities, not just one.
In the case of a classic thief skill, such as climb which is Str-based, the fighter is certainly Str prime (+6), and likely has a much higher score (say 16, so +2) than the thief. By 13th level the fighter has a +5 for being proficient. That's +13, meaning the thief has to be 13th level just to have equal odds of success in what is supposed to be a classic thief skill. Even if the thief is Str-prime, he still has to get to level 7.
Remember, the system of Primes models a character's ability with various types of tasks: it's a very simple skill system. So having the 5e rule is like a skill system on top of another skill system.
Many classic thief skills are not Dexterity based, and when you combine primes with the 5e rule, you can get most of the classic thief skills covered by other classes, as illustrated. And thus clearly, such a rule diminishes the role of thieves significantly.
Except since neither of us has the 8th printing, you don't actually know if that's what it is saying. I'd put money on it that the 8th printing does not copy pga5e. And i'd also put money on it that it still says an emulated ability is still very limited (quiet vs silent, etc).Based on the PGA (and I supposed the 8th printing), this is completely allowable in C&C. This is exactly what I've been saying all along. If you guys don't want to allow it, by all means, don't.
The Troll's vagueness may be an attempt to get us to buy the 8th printing. Heh.
-Fizz
Re: Characters using other class abilities
I just bought printing 8. The text they mentioned is Not in there. So I'm complaining to them..lol
Re: Characters using other class abilities
Lol, i thought so. I've been around this game a lot longer than you have (since 2005). Adding such a rule would have been completely inconsistent with everything since the original game.
-Fizz
Re: Characters using other class abilities
But even if a character doesn't add his/her level, as with a class ability, I don't see why s/he can't gain some amount of skill, especially if it doesn't come near to the level of a class ability. And that is what the PGA text says: add the skill bonus and ability mods and Not the character level.
I guess use it if you want, don't if you don't. I happen to like it.
I guess use it if you want, don't if you don't. I happen to like it.
Re: Characters using other class abilities
"Some" skill is very different to what you have been proposing. As illustrated, the pga5e version is not "some". It can give huge benefits that outshine another class for most of their career, and even make entire classes unnecessary.paladinn wrote: ↑Fri Mar 31, 2023 6:17 pmBut even if a character doesn't add his/her level, as with a class ability, I don't see why s/he can't gain some amount of skill, especially if it doesn't come near to the level of a class ability. And that is what the PGA text says: add the skill bonus and ability mods and Not the character level.
Say you make a fighter with high Wis prime, and takes 5e Survival as his skill. The fighter can then forage, pathfind, track, hunt, etc, better than a ranger until level ~10. 5e Survival covers the C&C ranger abilities of Track and Survival, maybe Delay Poison, plus the barbarian's Deerstalker. That's not "some" skill, that's dominating a huge portion of the emulated class. And that's why i think it's a very bad idea.
With C&C, simpler ideas are usually better. If you want to have your fighter be a bit sneaky, give him a +1 or +2 to be quiet (not silent). If your fighter is a pirate and used to climbing rigging, then maybe he gains +2 when climbing with ropes or trees (but not cliffs or walls), etc. The character gets a small boost and doesn't step on anyone's feet. I don't think anyone here would object if you handled it that way. You don't need a whole formalism from another system to add a bit of flavor.
-Fizz
Re: Characters using other class abilities
First of all, I never said to use "5e skills" right out of the 5e book. PGA has suggestions on how to use skills, and they can be defined as widely or narrowly as the CK wants. Just like the CKG has "advantages" that aren't quite the same as 5e feats. Everyone agrees that the 5e stuff BtB is too much for C&C.
Second, the PGA suggests allowing a few skills at L1 that grant a +2 bonus. How many depends on your class; rogues get 4. Then there is an ungrade every few levels up to a max of +6. That's not game-breaking, and doesn't come close to a rogue or ranger getting a +20 by the same level. Again, it's some skill, but not equal to a class ability. I thought we'd covered this before.
Third, the skills chosen don't have to be limited to non-class-abilities for a given class. If a rogue wants to be Spider-Man, s/he can take a Climb skill on top of the Climb class ability. That allows a little more variation between rogues, or rangers, etc. It's kind of like a toned-down version of Expertise from 5e.
Just curious, have you read the PGA5e?
Second, the PGA suggests allowing a few skills at L1 that grant a +2 bonus. How many depends on your class; rogues get 4. Then there is an ungrade every few levels up to a max of +6. That's not game-breaking, and doesn't come close to a rogue or ranger getting a +20 by the same level. Again, it's some skill, but not equal to a class ability. I thought we'd covered this before.
Third, the skills chosen don't have to be limited to non-class-abilities for a given class. If a rogue wants to be Spider-Man, s/he can take a Climb skill on top of the Climb class ability. That allows a little more variation between rogues, or rangers, etc. It's kind of like a toned-down version of Expertise from 5e.
Just curious, have you read the PGA5e?
Re: Characters using other class abilities
You said:paladinn wrote: ↑Fri Mar 31, 2023 8:14 pmFirst of all, I never said to use "5e skills" right out of the 5e book. PGA has suggestions on how to use skills, and they can be defined as widely or narrowly as the CK wants. Just like the CKG has "advantages" that aren't quite the same as 5e feats. Everyone agrees that the 5e stuff BtB is too much for C&C.
"If a skill mimics a class ability, it provides the skill bonus, but the PC doesn’t get to add their level, unless they’re a member of the class with the ability" - Players' Guide to Aihrde 5e, Appendix F: "Adding 5e to C&C", page 156."
I'm going on what you said. And 5e skills are much more broadly defined. In 5e, there is no "Climb", it's an aspect of Athletics. You said nothing about using subsets (sub-skills?) of 5e skills. So you're now changing the target.
Yes we did cover it before, in the post where i "role"-played the thief and fighter conversation. Per how 5e skills are defined, it was accurate. If i'm playing a thief, i don't want to wait until i'm 14th level to be a better climber than the fighter, or 11th to be a better listener than the cleric.Second, the PGA suggests allowing a few skills at L1 that grant a +2 bonus. How many depends on your class; rogues get 4. Then there is an ungrade every few levels up to a max of +6. That's not game-breaking, and doesn't come close to a rogue or ranger getting a +20 by the same level. Again, it's some skill, but not equal to a class ability. I thought we'd covered this before.
Typical 13th level fighter with 5e Climb: +6 (prime) +2 (str 16) +5 (skill) = +14.
Typical 13th level thief: +0 (no prime) +0 (str 10) +13 (level) = +13.
You argument seems to be with basic mathematics. If you're only considering 20th level, then you're missing where the vast majority of play occurs.
Seeing as 5e Expertise adds yet another bonus or grants even more skills, i'm not sure what you mean here. Regardless, you're adding a skill system (5e) on top of another skill system (primes). Are you sure you are actually interested in a class-based system, because it sounds like what you really want is a free-form skills-based system. Nothing wrong with that, but it's not C&C.Third, the skills chosen don't have to be limited to non-class-abilities for a given class. If a rogue wants to be Spider-Man, s/he can take a Climb skill on top of the Climb class ability. That allows a little more variation between rogues, or rangers, etc. It's kind of like a toned-down version of Expertise from 5e.
-Fizz
Re: Characters using other class abilities
You didn't reply to my earlier question. I will repeat it here.
Do you let other classes use Back Attack? After all, anyone can attack from behind, and it's not magical or divinely given. So do you let your fighters get a damage multiple if they can surprise the opponent from behind?
If you say "no", then what's the difference between Back Attack and other thief abilities? You'd be inconsistent in your rulings.
If you say "yes", then you're reinforcing that thieves/rogues are pointless, because there is nothing they do that someone else can't.
-Fizz
Do you let other classes use Back Attack? After all, anyone can attack from behind, and it's not magical or divinely given. So do you let your fighters get a damage multiple if they can surprise the opponent from behind?
If you say "no", then what's the difference between Back Attack and other thief abilities? You'd be inconsistent in your rulings.
If you say "yes", then you're reinforcing that thieves/rogues are pointless, because there is nothing they do that someone else can't.
-Fizz
Re: Characters using other class abilities
I said "skills", not "5e-skills". I quoted out of the PGA, but didn't quote the entire chapter. Read the book. You're criticizing something you've never read, and assuming things I never said. There are also skills mentioned in the CKG that would work with this option as well, including Climb, btw.Fizz wrote: ↑Fri Mar 31, 2023 8:38 pmNo, you said:paladinn wrote: ↑Fri Mar 31, 2023 8:14 pmFirst of all, I never said to use "5e skills" right out of the 5e book. PGA has suggestions on how to use skills, and they can be defined as widely or narrowly as the CK wants. Just like the CKG has "advantages" that aren't quite the same as 5e feats. Everyone agrees that the 5e stuff BtB is too much for C&C.
"If a skill mimics a class ability, it provides the skill bonus, but the PC doesn’t get to add their level, unless they’re a member of the class with the ability" - Players' Guide to Aihrde 5e, Appendix F: "Adding 5e to C&C", page 156."
I'm going on what you said. And 5e skills are much more broadly defined. You've said nothing about using subsets (sub-skills?) of 5e skills. So you're now changing the target.
Yes we did cover it before, in the post where i "role"-played the thief and fighter conversation. Per how 5e skills are defined, it was accurate. If i'm playing a thief, i don't want to wait until i'm 14th level to be a better climber than the fighter, or 11th to be a better listener than the cleric.Second, the PGA suggests allowing a few skills at L1 that grant a +2 bonus. How many depends on your class; rogues get 4. Then there is an ungrade every few levels up to a max of +6. That's not game-breaking, and doesn't come close to a rogue or ranger getting a +20 by the same level. Again, it's some skill, but not equal to a class ability. I thought we'd covered this before.
Typical 13th level fighter with 5e Climb: +6 (prime) +2 (str 16) +5 (skill) = +14.
Typical 13th level thief: +0 (no prime) +0 (str 10) +13 (level) = +13.
You argument seems to be with basic mathematics. If you're only considering 20th level, then you're missing where the vast majority of play occurs.
Seeing as 5e Expertise adds yet another bonus or grants even more skills, i'm not sure what you mean here. Regardless, you're adding a skill system (5e) on top of another skill system (primes). Are you sure you are actually interested in a class-based system, because it sounds like what you really want is a free-form skills-based system. Nothing wrong with that, but it's not C&C.Third, the skills chosen don't have to be limited to non-class-abilities for a given class. If a rogue wants to be Spider-Man, s/he can take a Climb skill on top of the Climb class ability. That allows a little more variation between rogues, or rangers, etc. It's kind of like a toned-down version of Expertise from 5e.
-Fizz
Again, your argument isn't with me, it's with the Trolls. If they thought a very basic skill mechanic was going to be as game-breaking as you seem to want to think, they wouldn't have suggested it for Their Game. But again, you're back to "if you play that way, it's not C&C".
It's all OPTIONAL. But you do you, buddy. Just don't ever house-rule anything.
Re: Characters using other class abilities
Normally no, I wouldn't let other classes back attack, because that is the rogue's "main thing." Just like other classes wouldn't get favored enemy or combat marauder. Although I have read in some of the manuals about the OPTION to swap some class features. So yes, you could end up with a fighter that can backstab or a rogue that can have combat dominance, if it's traded out.Fizz wrote: ↑Fri Mar 31, 2023 8:44 pmYou didn't reply to my other question. I will repeat it here.
Do you let other classes use Back Attack? After all, anyone can attack from behind, and it's not magical or divinely given. So do you let your fighters get a damage multiple if they can surprise the opponent from behind?
If you say "no", then what's the difference between Back Attack and other thief abilities? You'd be inconsistent in your rulings.
If you say "yes", then you're reinforcing that thieves/rogues are pointless, because there is nothing they do that someone else can't.
-Fizz
IIRC, those abilities don't rely on Siege checks, but are pretty much flat bonuses. I'd say that's the difference between an "exclusive" class ability and one that might be mimicked by a skill (at a much lower bonus).
And your assertion about rogues is kind of silly. All characters can fight; does that make fighters pointless? No, but fighters can do it best. Other characters can try to climb; rogues do it best.
Re: Characters using other class abilities
I'd say thieves are much more than Back Attack. Back Attack is the one thing that makes them semi-capable in combat. The main thing about the thief is getting to places others can't, undetected. You know, they steal stuff. It says so right in the description.
Swapping is different. That's effectively making a new class. We're talking about classes trying to do something not specified as an ability.Although I have read in some of the manuals about the OPTION to swap some class features. So yes, you could end up with a fighter that can backstab or a rogue that can have combat dominance, if it's traded out.
If it's a flat bonus, shouldn't that mean it's easier? If the rogue gets a bonus at 1st level, and can't get better at it, why can't the fighter do it after watching the thief for a level or two? It's a 1st level ability, so it should be easy right?IIRC, those abilities don't rely on Siege checks, but are pretty much flat bonuses. I'd say that's the difference between an "exclusive" class ability and one that might be mimicked by a skill (at a much lower bonus).
All characters can pick up a sword and engage in combat, yes. But can they FIGHT? Not all characters can specialize, not all characters have combat dominance, not all characters get extra attacks. Those are the special things that make fighters awesome at it. And that's why no one else has those abilities.And your assertion about rogues is kind of silly. All characters can fight; does that make fighters pointless? No, but fighters can do it best.
Not in your game they don't.Other characters can try to climb; rogues do it best.
-Fizz
Re: Characters using other class abilities
Yes, you said skills then referred to the pga5e. pga5e using 5e, and thus uses 5e skills. So i treated them as they are in 5e. How else was i supposed to take what you said?
No i'm critiquing what you said. The entire latter half of this thread has been about bringing 5e skills into C&C. And 5e skills work in a particular way, and i referrenced them in that way.Read the book. You're criticizing something you've never read, and assuming things I never said.
And yet that rule is not in the PH, the PGA for C&C, and not even in the latest printing of the PH. It's only in the pga5e, which was written for 5e players. And "Their Game", the game the Trolls play, does not have 5e skills of any kind. You can ask the members here who have actually played with them.Again, your argument isn't with me, it's with the Trolls. If they thought a very basic skill mechanic was going to be as game-breaking as you seem to want to think, they wouldn't have suggested it for Their Game.
Again not what i said. I said you seem to prefer a skills-based game to a class-based one. C&C is not a skills-based game, it is class-based. That is accurate.But again, you're back to "if you play that way, it's not C&C".
You don't need to say optional anymore. We all know this. It's not been stated otherwise. I will house-rule as i see fit, but the difference is none of mine will hurt a core class.It's all OPTIONAL. But you do you, buddy. Just don't ever house-rule anything.
If you don't want a critique, then why bring up the options here? This is not the place to come if you want everyone to agree with you. If you ask about importing a new rule, you shouldn't get upset if people dislike it. People here are under no obligation to agree with you.
-Fizz
- Go0gleplex
- Greater Lore Drake
- Posts: 4051
- Joined: Fri May 30, 2008 7:00 am
- Location: Keizer, OR
Re: Characters using other class abilities
In the words of the High Trolls themselves (cleaverthepit is actually Davis) as discussed in 2006. The answers to most of this discussion, which is about the 3rd or 5th time it's happened can be found with a successful SEARCH check.
https://www.trolllord.com/forums/viewto ... ills#p1301
https://www.trolllord.com/forums/viewto ... ills#p1301
"Rolling dice and killing characters since September 1976."
"Author of Wardogs! and Contributor to Iron Stars and Starmada-Admiralty ed."
"Certified crazy since 2009."
"Author of Wardogs! and Contributor to Iron Stars and Starmada-Admiralty ed."
"Certified crazy since 2009."
Re: Characters using other class abilities
That was 2006. PGA was written in 2019. And the Trolls confirmed via email that my understanding of it is correct.Go0gleplex wrote: ↑Fri Mar 31, 2023 10:47 pmIn the words of the High Trolls themselves (cleaverthepit is actually Davis) as discussed in 2006. The answers to most of this discussion, which is about the 3rd or 5th time it's happened can be found with a successful SEARCH check.
https://www.trolllord.com/forums/viewto ... ills#p1301
If you don't like it, that's fine; don't use it.
Re: Characters using other class abilities
Do you guys use the "class abilities are always prime" house rule?