Players Guide to Aihrde

[paladinn]

Hello all,

Not sure if this has been brought up, or if maybe I just missed it. I've gotten and am perusing the 5e Players Guide to Aihrde. It's not just for Aihrde or for 5e! The thing is a gold mine for ideas on ways to integrate 5e-ism's into a C&C game: skills, advantage, feats, ASI's, subclasses.. Tons of stuff! I'm sure I'll be digesting this for some time; but just from what I've seen, it's a great way to integrate some of the cool things into C&C while disregarding what you don't like.

Has anyone used it for such a purpose? I'd love to know folks' impressions.

Gratzi!

[Persimmon]

In my opinion there are no cool things in 5e. It's "The Rise of Skywalker" of D&D editions. So I disregard the whole edition, all its products, and the company that makes it. But to each their own:)

[Fizz]

In my opinion there are no cool things in 5e. It's "The Rise of Skywalker" of D&D editions. So I disregard the whole edition, all its products, and the company that makes it. But to each their own:)

Don't hold back. Tell us how you really feel. Lol.

-Fizz

[Grandpa]

The thing is a gold mine for ideas on ways to integrate 5e-ism's into a C&C game

Why would anyone want to do that? 5e is as much like D&D as Hero Kids

[paladinn]

The thing is a gold mine for ideas on ways to integrate 5e-ism's into a C&C game

Why would anyone want to do that? 5e is as much like D&D as Hero Kids

Options.. C&C is great and I love it as-is, but there are some things that I might want to do differently. Characters can have skills that don't rise to the level of class abilities. CK's might want to allow limited versions of feats or ability increases. Maybe something so 5 rogues aren't all identical. Stuff like that.

I know role-play can account for a lot of that, but some players, Especially those coming from 3e or 5e, might appreciate a Tad more crunch. And options are a good thing.

[Go0gleplex]

4e = World of War D&D
5e = AD&D for Dummies (book title parody for those unable to tell)

Both are what drove me to C&C, so I guess there was something good that came outta them. Not much else I've ever seen though.

[paladinn]

4e = World of War D&D
5e = AD&D for Dummies (book title parody for those unable to tell)

Both are what drove me to C&C, so I guess there was something good that came outta them. Not much else I've ever seen though.

Agree about 4e, completely.

Like I said, C&C is totally my game of choice now, but there are some things I like to glean from other such games. Good ideas are good ideas.

[maximus]

In my opinion there are no cool things in 5e. It's "The Rise of Skywalker" of D&D editions. So I disregard the whole edition, all its products, and the company that makes it. But to each their own:)

It's anathema...

[Grandpa]

Maybe something so 5 rogues aren't all identical. Stuff like that.

They aren't unless you make them so. Probably getting more familiar with the C&C rule set would help you overcome some of the things you have mentioned.

[paladinn]

Maybe something so 5 rogues aren't all identical. Stuff like that.

They aren't unless you make them so. Probably getting more familiar with the C&C rule set would help you overcome some of the things you have mentioned.

I'm familiar. And no one's making you do anything. I just thought the material was interesting. And it is from the Trolls soo...

[Ancalagon]

In my opinion there are no cool things in 5e. It's "The Rise of Skywalker" of D&D editions. <snip>

Agreed.

The thing is a gold mine for ideas on ways to integrate 5e-ism's into a C&C game

Why would anyone want to do that? 5e is as much like D&D as Hero Kids

Heh. Nice.

4e = World of War D&D
5e = AD&D for Dummies (book title parody for those unable to tell)

Both are what drove me to C&C, so I guess there was something good that came outta them. Not much else I've ever seen though.

Emphasis mine. Agreed.

<snip>
I've gotten and am perusing the 5e Players Guide to Aihrde. It's not just for Aihrde or for 5e! The thing is a gold mine for ideas on ways to integrate 5e-ism's into a C&C game: skills, advantage, feats, ASI's, subclasses.. Tons of stuff! I'm sure I'll be digesting this for some time; but just from what I've seen, it's a great way to integrate some of the cool things into C&C while disregarding what you don't like.

Has anyone used it for such a purpose? I'd love to know folks' impressions.
<snip>

Emphasis mine.
My impression? The incessant pimping of 5e on the C&C boards is tiresome.

[Fizz]

I agree with others who dislike 5e, though it is certainly much better than 4e was.

But C&C is quite modular; a basic framework for other things. It's just as easy to add 2nd Ed proficiencies as it is 3e or 5e feats. So if someone finds something in 5e that they can make work in their C&C game, i've no issue with that. It's not for me or anyone else to tell others how to have fun.


-Fizz

[Fizz]

My impression? The incessant pimping of 5e on the C&C boards is tiresome.

Based on most of the replies to this thread, if anything is incessant it's the bashing of 5e.

I don't object to bashing 5e, but asking if anyone had any thoughts about using some ideas from PGtA (several of which have related ideas in the CKG) is not "pimping of 5e".


-Fizz

[paladinn]

In my opinion there are no cool things in 5e. It's "The Rise of Skywalker" of D&D editions. <snip>

Agreed.

The thing is a gold mine for ideas on ways to integrate 5e-ism's into a C&C game

Why would anyone want to do that? 5e is as much like D&D as Hero Kids

Heh. Nice.

4e = World of War D&D
5e = AD&D for Dummies (book title parody for those unable to tell)

Both are what drove me to C&C, so I guess there was something good that came outta them. Not much else I've ever seen though.

Emphasis mine. Agreed.

<snip>
I've gotten and am perusing the 5e Players Guide to Aihrde. It's not just for Aihrde or for 5e! The thing is a gold mine for ideas on ways to integrate 5e-ism's into a C&C game: skills, advantage, feats, ASI's, subclasses.. Tons of stuff! I'm sure I'll be digesting this for some time; but just from what I've seen, it's a great way to integrate some of the cool things into C&C while disregarding what you don't like.

Has anyone used it for such a purpose? I'd love to know folks' impressions.
<snip>

Emphasis mine.
My impression? The incessant pimping of 5e on the C&C boards is tiresome.

Not pimping anything. This was material from Troll Lord about possibly integrating optional features from 5e. No need for all the hostility. Someone out there might not think like you.

[KaiserKris]

Hello all,

Not sure if this has been brought up, or if maybe I just missed it. I've gotten and am perusing the 5e Players Guide to Aihrde. It's not just for Aihrde or for 5e! The thing is a gold mine for ideas on ways to integrate 5e-ism's into a C&C game: skills, advantage, feats, ASI's, subclasses.. Tons of stuff! I'm sure I'll be digesting this for some time; but just from what I've seen, it's a great way to integrate some of the cool things into C&C while disregarding what you don't like.

Has anyone used it for such a purpose? I'd love to know folks' impressions.

Gratzi!

I'm sorry that your post was greeted so unhelpfully.

As someone who's played and plays both games, I would preach caution about integrating too much 5E content into Castles and Crusades. Not saying that you can't do it, but the basis of the games is fairly different. C&C is essentially AD&D with a version of d20 mechanics. In practice, this means that old-school D&D material fits basically flawlessly into the engine, once you flip the AC. Because it uses a version of d20 mechanics, 3-3.5 edition material usually fits in well enough if you rein in the numbers/power level a bit. Heaven knows I took plenty of Pathfinder 1E material and put it into games.

Both 4th and 5th edition use the most basic form of the d20 mechanic, but take it in different directions. Feats in 5E are different beasts than Advantages or 3/3.5/Pathfinder 1E feats, they're a much bigger part of what makes a character work. To make them fit into C&C, you'd probably have to cut them down quite a lot. You also have to remember that 5E uses bounded accuracy, so the assumptions behind the math are different. The class/subclass system is also something that doesn't really have a peer in C&C.

Some of the things that I think would be easy to bring in without too badly changing the game are:
1.) Judicious use of the advantage/disadvantage mechanic (but given the bigger swing of numbers in C&C, I'd be careful about doing this too liberally)
2.) ASIs. I've never run a C&C game that didn't have them. I usually just went +1 on a Prime of choice.
3.) Homebrewed versions of any 5e classes or races you like. Just remember that ability scores in C&C are +1, -1, generally. You can do it otherwise, but just make it consistent.

The Skills are tricky to work in without trampling on the SIEGE Engine. Feats could work, but would universally need to be pared down- some of the feats are very, very powerful even in 5E, which is a game that is definitely intended for heroic, arguably even superheroic fantasy. Some of the spells would work, but things like the scaling cantrips and easy healing will change the intended flow of C&C enormously.

[paladinn]

I'm sorry that your post was greeted so unhelpfully.

As someone who's played and plays both games, I would preach caution about integrating too much 5E content into Castles and Crusades. Not saying that you can't do it, but the basis of the games is fairly different. C&C is essentially AD&D with a version of d20 mechanics. In practice, this means that old-school D&D material fits basically flawlessly into the engine, once you flip the AC. Because it uses a version of d20 mechanics, 3-3.5 edition material usually fits in well enough if you rein in the numbers/power level a bit. Heaven knows I took plenty of Pathfinder 1E material and put it into games.

Both 4th and 5th edition use the most basic form of the d20 mechanic, but take it in different directions. Feats in 5E are different beasts than Advantages or 3/3.5/Pathfinder 1E feats, they're a much bigger part of what makes a character work. To make them fit into C&C, you'd probably have to cut them down quite a lot. You also have to remember that 5E uses bounded accuracy, so the assumptions behind the math are different. The class/subclass system is also something that doesn't really have a peer in C&C.

Some of the things that I think would be easy to bring in without too badly changing the game are:
1.) Judicious use of the advantage/disadvantage mechanic (but given the bigger swing of numbers in C&C, I'd be careful about doing this too liberally)
2.) ASIs. I've never run a C&C game that didn't have them. I usually just went +1 on a Prime of choice.
3.) Homebrewed versions of any 5e classes or races you like. Just remember that ability scores in C&C are +1, -1, generally. You can do it otherwise, but just make it consistent.

The Skills are tricky to work in without trampling on the SIEGE Engine. Feats could work, but would universally need to be pared down- some of the feats are very, very powerful even in 5E, which is a game that is definitely intended for heroic, arguably even superheroic fantasy. Some of the spells would work, but things like the scaling cantrips and easy healing will change the intended flow of C&C enormously.

Thanks for the support! As for all the feedback.. Options are like something else.. Everyone's got one.

I know that 5e is definitely a different game, and C&C is very much my game of choice. Your analogy of the game is spot-on. That said, I've noticed that a number of players and especially CK's view C&C as a foundation on which to build. And it's flexible enough to allow a fair amount of tweaking without breaking.

I'm not a big fan of bounded accuracy; but I find C&C's "add your level" mechanic to be analogous to the proficency bonus idea in 5e (I know C&C was first!) If I allow feats/advantages, it would be in lieu of an ASI; but ASI's would be limited to +1 to a stat, and I would Not use 5e feats. Ultimately I'd like to have a rendition of the fighter that has a few "unique" class features but still has a lot of feats/advantages/tactics. I like the take on skills in PGA; a simple +2 on top of the stat bonus, or maybe more at higher levels.

One thing I would Love to import is 5e's spellcasting system. "Fire-and-forget" has long been the bane of my RPG existence. I much prefer using spell slots or spell points, both of which have manifestations in the CKG. But I would limit spell effects to the spell level, not the caster level, ala 5e. This greatly limits the total power of casters, but they do have more flexibility.

There's a lot to digest, but it's fun brain candy, even if I never get to publish my hybrid game.

[Captain_K]

You have my support too. You ran the gauntlet there. Way to stay cool and polite (actually to all of you).

I like CnC and CnC is moving to make money and introduce itself to 5e for a reason - please do not nuke me on this. But they are I think kind of close in some ways.

We steal from the CKG which I assume is close to 5e or other DnD variants with some of its suggestions and love them in the game:
1) luck points d6+2 each game - PCs add to any roll point for point before the roll or twice as expensively after. 3 points gets you advantage on a roll.
2) use of advantage and disadvantage from time to time - kind of a fun simple mechanic similar to simple + or - to a roll. Who doesn't like rolling more dice!
3) skills from 2ed DnD to put more life and back story to your simple fighter or mage. Hey I know mushrooms! Good I can put them in a nice cream sauce!
4) I do not like or use the feats from CKG in the games I run but one of the best DMs out there INFURNO does and does it well and I like playing my assassin-cleric with his master archery so I cannot shoot my friends on a 2, 3, or 4. His other feat to silently and without gestures (V & S) allows me to sneak up, call up and cast a spell and really surprise the bad guys!
5) I'm kind of a world history, beliefs and languages guy, so we run limited languages you can speak, even more limits on reading/writing and the whole world and all its races do NOT speak common. Thus, breathing life back into a few spells.
6) I almost forgot I do from time-to-time use hero points - the jury is still out on this one for me. Also, from the CKG.

I do not directly play 5e, but it is where the money and the masses are right now. It will likely seep in or out of favor in small or large bits. I agree, use caution and check the CnC CKG as likely safe starting points.

[Captain_K]

OH, I did not ask, how do you like the "unique" world and story of Aihrde?

[Grandpa]

I like CnC and TL's is moving to make money and introduce itself to 5e for a reason - please do not nuke me on this. But they are I think kind of close in some ways.

TL's makes 5E material to make money and expose a large audience to the fact that C&C exists. More power to them. The designers of 5E looked HARD at C&C while designing the game. Anybody who has played both can see the C&C influence in 5th. TLs hasn't ported anything into the rules of C&C from 5th. I highly doubt that they will based on the design philosophy of C&C. C&C seeks to be what AD&D was with a modern rule mechanic. Nothing in 5th would enhance that in C&C.

[paladinn]

OH, I did not ask, how do you like the "unique" world and story of Aihrde?

Still digesting it all.. Film at 11 lol

[paladinn]

TL's makes 5E material to make money and expose a large audience to the fact that C&C exists. More power to them. The designers of 5E looked HARD at C&C while designing the game. Anybody who has played both can see the C&C influence in 5th. TLs hasn't ported anything into the rules of C&C from 5th. I highly doubt that they will based on the design philosophy of C&C. C&C seeks to be what AD&D was with a modern rule mechanic. Nothing in 5th would enhance that in C&C.

Some would disagree. C&C is absolutely a complete game. But some people appreciate a tad more detail and a bit more "crunch". Options are a good thing. Adapting things from elsewhere don't take away from the game at all.

[Grandpa]

Some would disagree.

Of course. But no one has presented any rules from 5E that would make C&C more like original D&D. At least not here.

[Fizz]

C&C seeks to be what AD&D was with a modern rule mechanic. Nothing in 5th would enhance that in C&C.
...
Of course. But no one has presented any rules from 5E that would make C&C more like original D&D. At least not here.

You originally said AD&D, and later original D&D, so i'm not sure to which you mean. (Maybe both?)

But i was thinking about your point. It depends on the rules being used. Later AD&D books like Dungeoneer's Survival Guide and Wilderness Survival Guide included non-weapon proficiencies.

So if one wanted the equivalent of AD&D's non-weapon proficiencies in C&C, following the philosophy of a "modern rule mechanic" one could use the skill system from 5e. Thus:

C&C core is like AD&D without nwp
C&C + 5e skills is more like AD&D with nwp than C&C alone.


Note I'm not recommending this by any means, but it's one conceivable way that 5e could make C&C more like AD&D, depending on the features that one wants to include.


-Fizz

[paladinn]

I kind of like the suggestion from PGA to allow a Few skills based on class that would give a small bonus. If it's another class' ability, you can still add the skill bonus and stat bonus, but not your level. Technically if it is one of your class abilities, you can add both.. be the stealthiest rogue that ever hid in shadows (not that you'd want to).

You start off with a +2 as a skill bonus, and get 2, 3 or 4 skills depending on class. The skill bonus goes up by +1 at L5, 9, 13 and 17, max +6 at L17. This mirrors the proficiency bonus progression of 5e, but obviously doesn't rise to the level of a class ability; but it is a boost if a character is skilled. The only thing I might add is the ability to get New skills as one progresses. Pondering.

[Grandpa]

But i was thinking about your point. It depends on the rules being used. Later AD&D books like Dungeoneer's Survival Guide and Wilderness Survival Guide included non-weapon proficiencies.

-Fizz

Core rules. What RULES from 5E would make C&C MORE like 1st Ed experience ?

[Fizz]

Core rules. What RULES from 5E would make C&C MORE like 1st Ed experience ?

Well i answered that in my previous post. The 5e skill system would make C&C more like 1st ed AD&D, because AD&D had a proficiency system and C&C does not.

Now, i suspect you'll counter that nonweapon proficiencies weren't in the core rules, referring to the PH. Well, neither were the knight, barbarian and bard (as standalone) classes. The C&C knight and barbarian have their ultimate origins in Unearthed Arcana. And the fighter's weapon specialization also first appeared in UA, not the PH.

So if you're going to claim that C&C is meant to emulate AD&D with a modern mechanic, you must include other books (not just the PH) as valid source material as well. If C&C was meant to emulate only the AD&D PH, then C&C wouldn't have the knight, barbarian, or weapon specialization (and probably a number of spells).


-Fizz

[Grandpa]

Well i answered that in my previous post. The 5e skill system would make C&C more like 1st ed AD&D, because AD&D had a proficiency system and C&C does not.
-Fizz

AD&D 1st had a secondary skill list in the DMG. There was no proficiency system in the core rules. So what in 5e would make C&C more like AD&D core?

[paladinn]

Well i answered that in my previous post. The 5e skill system would make C&C more like 1st ed AD&D, because AD&D had a proficiency system and C&C does not.
-Fizz

AD&D 1st had a secondary skill list in the DMG. There was no proficiency system in the core rules. So what in 5e would make C&C more like AD&D core?

If you're talking 1e before the survival guides, there's not a lot. But you did specify "AD&D"; and 2e has a few things like weapon specialization and NWP's.

Of course your Original question would have been about OD&D, and that was a different kettle of fish..

[Fizz]

Well i answered that in my previous post. The 5e skill system would make C&C more like 1st ed AD&D, because AD&D had a proficiency system and C&C does not.
-Fizz

AD&D 1st had a secondary skill list in the DMG. There was no proficiency system in the core rules. So what in 5e would make C&C more like AD&D core?

Already stated earlier. I'll rephrase again.

Your premise is that C&C is meant to emulate AD&D with an updated mechanic. Because C&C has such classes as barbarian and knight, and weapon specialization, clearly it was meant to emulate more than the just the PH. The Survival guides had the nonweapon proficiency system, (which were clearly popular since it survived into 2nd and ultimately became 3e skills).

So again: C&C + 5e skills is more like AD&D with nonweapon proficiencies than the C&C PH alone.

If you're going to stick to the "core" (which i presume means PH only) argument, then your premise that C&C is merely an updated AD&D "core" would not be correct, because clearly it is attempting to emulate more material than just the PH.

For the record, the PH did have proficiencies, just not nonweapon proficiencies. Actually, that's another key difference: C&C does not have proficiencies: a C&C class is equally skilled with all the weapons on their list, whereas in AD&D (core!) the class had to choose specific weapons for proficiency.


-Fizz

[Fizz]

If you're talking 1e before the survival guides, there's not a lot. But you did specify "AD&D"; and 2e has a few things like weapon specialization and NWP's.

Agreed. And i think that's what Grandpa is referring to as "core", just the 1st AD&D PH. My point is that C&C is attempting to be an update of a system of more than just the 1st ed PH. Thus the 5e skill system would make C&C more like the complete AD&D.

I should also emphasize again that i personally would not include 5e material in C&C. I'm only saying it is a possibility for enhancement. Personally, i go the other direction and use 2nd ed proficiencies. I miss 2nd ed in many ways. Heh.

-Fizz