Very interesting!
Characters using other class abilities
Re: Characters using other class abilities
CORE RULES of C&C are found in the PHB and M&T. The Trolls have made no such proposals to change the core rules. Please show me where they have made such proposals...
Re: Characters using other class abilities
I never said they did. But I don't think the OPTIONAL rules in PGA are game-breaking. Neither do the Trolls, or they wouldn't have suggested them.
If you don't like them, that's your choice. But your opinions aren't binding on everyone.
Do you ever play with any houserules? I would think these OPTIONAL rules are at least as valid as any houserules. Because they come from the folks that made the game.
Re: Characters using other class abilities
My understanding is that anyone can try any skill (within reason), but the 12 vs 18 challenge base applies based on whether you have the appropriate stat and whether or not you can add your level depends on whether or not it's on of your class skills.
Wanna Climb a Wall?
Climb is Dex. Climb is a Thief skill.
Thieves have the Climb Skill and have Dex as their prime. Thieves have a 12 base and can add their level to the roll.
Some rando non-thief with Dex as one of their primes has a 12 base and cannot add their level to the roll.
Some rando non-thief without Dex as one of their primes has a 18 base and cannot add their level to the roll. Fat chance.
A Thief who doesn't have Dex as a prime....probably isn't a Thief, so nevermind.
Am I wrong here?
Wanna Climb a Wall?
Climb is Dex. Climb is a Thief skill.
Thieves have the Climb Skill and have Dex as their prime. Thieves have a 12 base and can add their level to the roll.
Some rando non-thief with Dex as one of their primes has a 12 base and cannot add their level to the roll.
Some rando non-thief without Dex as one of their primes has a 18 base and cannot add their level to the roll. Fat chance.
A Thief who doesn't have Dex as a prime....probably isn't a Thief, so nevermind.
Am I wrong here?
Re: Characters using other class abilities
You are not wrong. You have this correct. However, the rules recommend that generally the CK should not allow a character to use an ability that belongs to another class. Combine that with the notion that classes always perform their abilities at levels beyond non-classes, and I think all class abilities are meant to be extraordinary- beyond what regular folk can do. (Otherwise why make them class abilities?)DM_Curt wrote: ↑Sat Mar 11, 2023 5:02 amMy understanding is that anyone can try any skill (within reason), but the 12 vs 18 challenge base applies based on whether you have the appropriate stat and whether or not you can add your level depends on whether or not it's on of your class skills.
Wanna Climb a Wall?
Climb is Dex. Climb is a Thief skill.
Thieves have the Climb Skill and have Dex as their prime. Thieves have a 12 base and can add their level to the roll.
Some rando non-thief with Dex as one of their primes has a 12 base and cannot add their level to the roll.
Some rando non-thief without Dex as one of their primes has a 18 base and cannot add their level to the roll. Fat chance.
A Thief who doesn't have Dex as a prime....probably isn't a Thief, so nevermind.
Am I wrong here?
IMO, it's the naming of several thief abilities from 3E that do them a disservice and cause confusion. In your case, consider Climb. Anyone can climb a ladder- no check is needed. But what if you were trying to climb that ladder during a vicious storm? In that case, it might require a check (because it's slippery). Anyone could still try it, but the storm means failure is an option, and the thief gets to add their level to the check.
Now, what if instead of a ladder it was a brick wall- no ladder or rope or any other support? This is something only the thief can attempt. A cleric could no more climb this surface than a thief could turn undead. How to cling to that surface is special, impossible to those without very special training. It is an extraordinary ability.
So the thief ability should not be named "Climb", it should really be named "Climb Sheer Surfaces". That makes it clear that it's a special ability; that it's not just climbing anything (which any shmoe can do if there are nice big hand/foot holds).
Now apply the same logic to other thief (and assassin and ranger too) abilities. For example, it's not "Hide", any shmoe can jump behind a desk or curtain. It should be "Hide in Shadows". Etc etc.
-Fizz
Re: Characters using other class abilities
Yes, I think this is the key to differentiating a Class skill from an ordinary action any person can attempt. Ordinary vs. extraordinary ability.
Re: Characters using other class abilities
Why does it have to be all-or-nothing? People have different levels of ability.
Fitz said, "Classes always perform their abilities at levels beyond non-classes." That's clear and a given. Even if a fighter has some skill at, say, picking pockets, s/he will never rise to the level of a thief. And no one is suggesting that should happen.
I get that introducing a simple "skill mechanic" is not going to be for everyone. Just like in D&D, there are those that have houserules and those that go strictly BtB (Although I wager that Everyone houserules something sometime). I think the guidelines from PGA can give a way for characters to show some ability that they could otherwise never even try.
If you don't have a given class ability And you don't have any skill, you're still hosed. But if you're a thief And you take extra skill in Climb (which is an option, according to PGA), now you're Spider-Man. I happen to think it's cool.
Fitz said, "Classes always perform their abilities at levels beyond non-classes." That's clear and a given. Even if a fighter has some skill at, say, picking pockets, s/he will never rise to the level of a thief. And no one is suggesting that should happen.
I get that introducing a simple "skill mechanic" is not going to be for everyone. Just like in D&D, there are those that have houserules and those that go strictly BtB (Although I wager that Everyone houserules something sometime). I think the guidelines from PGA can give a way for characters to show some ability that they could otherwise never even try.
If you don't have a given class ability And you don't have any skill, you're still hosed. But if you're a thief And you take extra skill in Climb (which is an option, according to PGA), now you're Spider-Man. I happen to think it's cool.
Re: Characters using other class abilities
Because a class ability is (should be) something that goes beyond what normal people can do. Turn Undead is also an attribute-based ability. Do you let non-clerics try to turn undead, or let non-clerics pick up a few skill points in Turn Undead? I'm guessing not. So why should a cleric be able to climb sheer surfaces like a thief?
I'm Fizz. Not Fitz.Fitz said,
That's like saying you're hosed when you encounter undead and don't have a cleric. Yeah... what's wrong with that?If you don't have a given class ability And you don't have any skill, you're still hosed. But if you're a thief And you take extra skill in Climb (which is an option, according to PGA), now you're Spider-Man. I happen to think it's cool.
Obstacles are generally either climbable or not climbable- they either have hand/foot holds or you have gear that provide such. Anyone can climb, and maybe they have a bonus due to a mountaineering background or somesuch. But they can't climb a sheer surface without help (ropes, grapples, etc). Only a thief can climb a flat wall without assistance. Likewise, anyone can hide behind a curtain, but only a thief can disappear in a seemingly empty room. These extraordinary abilities are what makes being a thief worthwhile, and different from other classes.
I think you are conflating skills with class abilities. I'm fine with a skill system that covers things that anyone could learn (per secondary skills as described in the CKG). But they should not tread on the special abiltiies of another class. You are treating thief abilities as 3e rogue skills that anyone could improve. I'm saying thief abilities are not that. They are unique to the thief as multi-attack is to the fighter and spellcasting is to the wizard.
Thieves have "Climb" as an ability, but no one thinks that only thieves can climb a ladder. So clearly the ability is meant to be something more than that. That's why i say they are misnamed- the bad legacy of 3E that made thief skills mundane and boring by incorporating them into a generic skill system. No, the ability should be named "climb sheer surfaces". And no one else should be able to do that, just as no one but a cleric can Turn Undead.
If anyone can pick up some thief abilities, then there is not much reason to have a thief, is there? "We don't really need a thief, the fighter can do a bit of sneaking, the barbarian can handle the pick-pocketing, the cleric can climb some walls, the knight will pick up some lock-picking, and the wizard can be our trap-finder. So we'll get by."
I think having extra abilities is better modelled through multi-classing or class-and-a-half rules.
Now, there is nothing inherently wrong with game systems that don't have classes; where everything is based on skills and everyone can learn anything. But that's not the nature of class-based systems.
-Fizz
Re: Characters using other class abilities
I don't know what PGA does, and whether this is from the 5e version (of which i'd be skeptical), or from the C&C version.
But i would say there is a fundamental difference between making a customized character and using the ability of another class. In the former, the ability is added to the class (effectively it's a new class). In the latter, the ability does not belong to that class, and so still falls under the standard rules.
If they're just adding a small static bonus, then it sounds like they are also conflating secondary skills with abilities... being more 3e+ than D&D.
-Fizz
Re: Characters using other class abilities
Players' Guide to Aihdre 5e, by Stephen Chenault, from Troll Lord Games. Appendix F: Adding 5E to C&C. Page 156. Skills.
Again, this is all OPTIONAL. If someone doesn't like it, don't use it. Put don't poop on an idea just because it mentions 5e. It did come from TLG, and I'd think they'd know their own game. If you ever use a houserule, anytime, you've added to the game too.
Re: Characters using other class abilities
I am not criticizing because it mentions 5e. I criticize because skills in that manner diminish the importance of the thief class. Whether it's 3e, 5e, or PGA, if other classes can do thiefly things, then thieves become less relevant and special. In my opinion, this addition doesn't add to the game, it diminishes an entire class.
Again, thief abilities should be like turn undead is to a cleric, or extra-attack to a fighter, or spellcasting to a wizard. And again i ask- would you let a thief turn undead? Would you let a thief cast magic? Of course not, not without multiclassing. Why the double standard?
Also, it is not about the Trolls "knowing their own game". In the PH and CKG, it specifically says not to allow cross-class abilities. So why are you ignoring that detail, don't the Trolls know their own game? The 5e PGA is written for 5e players, and i suspect the mention of C&C is primarily a marketing move. "Hey 5e player, did you know you can add 5e mechanics to C&C? You should try C&C!"
Ultimately, I am sticking up for the glory of thieves. Don't diminish their awesomeness by letting other characters do what only they should be able to do.
-Fizz
- Go0gleplex
- Greater Lore Drake
- Posts: 4065
- Joined: Fri May 30, 2008 7:00 am
- Location: Keizer, OR
Re: Characters using other class abilities
It came from TLG because they were trying to keep their material inclusive of the 5e market. NOT because it was intended to be part of their game but part of those groups wanting the setting for 5e use; and like Fizz said, hoping to attract them away from 5e to the cooler C&C rules. The idea of options is to tweak your game play...not replace rules wholesale to change the game itself. Generally speaking, someone that really appreciates and enjoys a game, tends to play it as is with few tweaks and even fewer changes. The ones that like to bring changes wholesale from their past game or another game...well...eventually they go play that other game due to dissatisfaction and/or lack of support of their desired changes from others.
And as Grandpa and Fizz have stated, the CORE books consist of only the PHB and M&T. ALL other books are optional filler and fluff per Steve and Davis both in various discussions I and others have been part of with them over the years in person and in chat; this includes the CKG.
I agree with Fizz. The naming choices could have been much better to create a more defined gap between general type skills anyone can do vs the specialized stuff individual classes are known for.
And as Grandpa and Fizz have stated, the CORE books consist of only the PHB and M&T. ALL other books are optional filler and fluff per Steve and Davis both in various discussions I and others have been part of with them over the years in person and in chat; this includes the CKG.
I agree with Fizz. The naming choices could have been much better to create a more defined gap between general type skills anyone can do vs the specialized stuff individual classes are known for.
"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
The three of you are misrepresenting what I have said. I am firmly on board with class abilities being exactly that. No one else gets to add their level to a class ability check. Ever. But C&C has always been about "anyone can try anything." If someone tries and they fail, they fail, even if s/he has some measure of skill with a given ability. And according to PGA, the "skill bonus" can never be above a +6, so it's not stepping on anyone's toes that hard.
There is a big difference between a thief's (it's actually Rogue in core C&C - BtB) ability to climb or pick pocket or what have you, and a cleric's ability to turn undead or a wizard's spellcasting. Those abilities are explicitly "magical"/supernatural. What a rogue does, anyone can try, even if s/he fails miserably. There's always a (small) chance s/he might succeed. Trying to cast a spell or turn undead is futile on the face of it. This is a complete straw-man argument at best.
I'm glad you guys are gifted with telepathy enough to know the Trolls' motives in printing what they did in PGA. I am not so gifted, so I accept what they did at face value. In RPG's, later printings and publications typically supersede what was published before. If someone doesn't want to acknowledge the change in perspective, that's up to them. But don't condemn someone who wants to adopt/adapt what the authors of the game have put out.
p.s. I came to C&C from 5e. It's definitely my game of choice now; but good ideas are good ideas!
There is a big difference between a thief's (it's actually Rogue in core C&C - BtB) ability to climb or pick pocket or what have you, and a cleric's ability to turn undead or a wizard's spellcasting. Those abilities are explicitly "magical"/supernatural. What a rogue does, anyone can try, even if s/he fails miserably. There's always a (small) chance s/he might succeed. Trying to cast a spell or turn undead is futile on the face of it. This is a complete straw-man argument at best.
I'm glad you guys are gifted with telepathy enough to know the Trolls' motives in printing what they did in PGA. I am not so gifted, so I accept what they did at face value. In RPG's, later printings and publications typically supersede what was published before. If someone doesn't want to acknowledge the change in perspective, that's up to them. But don't condemn someone who wants to adopt/adapt what the authors of the game have put out.
p.s. I came to C&C from 5e. It's definitely my game of choice now; but good ideas are good ideas!
Re: Characters using other class abilities
"If you’re a fan of C&C, you’ll enjoy a few things herein as well—in particular, Appendix F, which includes guidelines for using Fifth Edition elements in your SIEGE Engine Games." - Jason Vey, from the intro to Players Guide to Aihrde 5e
Notice it's for "fans of C&C."
Notice it's for "fans of C&C."
Re: Characters using other class abilities
According to the Core RAW "There will be times when a player will want a character to attempt an action that intrudes in the realm of the class ability of another character class. For example, a fighter might wish to open a lock, or a wizard might attempt to track. It is up to the Castle Keeper to decide if such an action is even possible. In general, it is recommended that a Castle Keeper should disallow a character a chance of success in attempting a non-class ability."
No one says you cannot make house rules to the contrary like allowing a chance of success.
Re: Characters using other class abilities
Grandpa covered this again in the previous post.
It's not different. You said "anyone can try anything".There is a big difference between a thief's (it's actually Rogue in core C&C - BtB) ability to climb or pick pocket or what have you, and a cleric's ability to turn undead or a wizard's spellcasting. Those abilities are explicitly "magical"/supernatural. What a rogue does, anyone can try, even if s/he fails miserably. There's always a (small) chance s/he might succeed. Trying to cast a spell or turn undead is futile on the face of it. This is a complete straw-man argument at best.
A wizard's ability to cast a spell is a learned task. What if a thief watched a wizard cast a spell and then said "i try to cast a spell by doing exactly what the wizard just did, holding the component in the same way, speaking the same words, all of it.". The thief is doing something entirely within his own control- copying the wizard. By your own position, you have to let him try and you have to give him a chance of success.
The cleric example is a bit more difficult to justify, i agree, because it is dependent on an outside party (the deity). But what if the thief becomes an adherent of a particular deity, follows all the rites, etc, and genuinely has the correct viewpoint for the deity. Why then would he not be allowed to try to turn undead? I don't think you would unless they multiclassed.
For a non-magical example, why can't a thief have an extra attack? Why can't a thief say "i try to attack really fast" like a fighter? What prevents a thief from trying to do so? Or what stops a thief from trying to rally troops like a knight? Or doing a whirlwind attack like a barbarian? All he has to say is "i spin around fast and try to hit everyone around me". By your reasoning you'd have to allow it with a chance of success, wouldn't you? It's not magical after all.
But more importantly, the part i think you are missing is that thief abilities are not things anyone can do. A thief can cling to a sheer surface even if there is nothing to hold. They can disappear on a whim (like in the Batman cartoons). And they can move not quietly, but absolutely silently with no chance of ever being heard by anything. As another example consider the Disguise ability of the assassin. That's not just dressing up with fake hair and clothes; rather think of the Faceless Men from Game of Thrones.
To borrow 3e terminology, these are all extraordinary abilities: not directly magical, but things that go beyond the normal laws of physics and not things that just anyone can attempt. Unfortunately, 3e made all thief skills mundane, but classic Hide in Shadows, Move Silently, Climb Walls, would all be considered extraordinary had they used those kind of descriptors back in the day.
But you're not acknowledging the core rule that specifically says class abilities should not be allowed by other classes. If the Trolls had wanted such skill expansions, wouldn't they have done so in other books? Does the PGA c&c version mention doing this for skills? I'm guessing not.I'm glad you guys are gifted with telepathy enough to know the Trolls' motives in printing what they did in PGA. I am not so gifted, so I accept what they did at face value. In RPG's, later printings and publications typically supersede what was published before. If someone doesn't want to acknowledge the change in perspective, that's up to them. But don't condemn someone who wants to adopt/adapt what the authors of the game have put out.
If subsequent products superceded older publications, then that means C&C is effectively making a new edition of the game, because they're changing the rules. And they have consistently said they are not going to do that.
-Fizz
Re: Characters using other class abilities
Paladinn, i want to reiterate what Grandpa says here. I will vigourously defend why i think these skill ideas are a bad idea, how it hurts thieves, how it goes against the C&C core premise, etc. But ultimately this is a game. It's about having fun. If you and your group have fun with it, by all means do it.
You may be wrong, but i don't think you're a bad person or anything.
-Fizz
Re: Characters using other class abilities
In fact, I would allow a Rogue to try. Even if they fail miserably. Btw, your calling the class "thief" isn't BtB..Fizz wrote: ↑Sun Mar 12, 2023 12:55 amFor a non-magical example, why can't a thief have an extra attack? Why can't a thief say "i try to attack really fast" like a fighter? What prevents a thief from trying to do so? Or what stops a thief from trying to rally troops like a knight? Or doing a whirlwind attack like a barbarian? All he has to say is "i spin around fast and try to hit everyone around me". By your reasoning you'd have to allow it with a chance of success, wouldn't you? It's not magical after all.
Read it for yourself. This is the second assumption you've made that is wrong.Fizz wrote: ↑Sun Mar 12, 2023 12:55 amBut you're not acknowledging the core rule that specifically says class abilities should not be allowed by other classes. If the Trolls had wanted such skill expansions, wouldn't they have done so in other books? Does the PGA c&c version mention doing this for skills? I'm guessing not.
This is kind of funny. They change stuff with every printing of the game! Just because they don't call it a "new edition" doesn't mean they don't change things. I believe they used to have a way different saving throw system that what they have now.
I don't think you guys are bad people either (even if Grandpa called me a "coward" before). And if y'all want to limit your games to what's in the PHB and M&T, it's your game. But I think the Trolls publish materials for a reason, and there's nothing wrong with using what they've published. In the case of the PGA, I think it maintains the core of what constitutes a "class ability" while allowing players another means of customizing. Conan was a pretty accomplished "thief"; but he may not have been a "rogue" in C&C terms.
Peace!
Re: Characters using other class abilities
OK, so why not spellcasting? It's something that people learn, and the act of learning is not magical.
How do you know i'm not referring to the class in Adventurer's Backpack?Btw, your calling the class "thief" isn't BtB..
But for that matter, the PH says rogues are "simply the ultimate thieves".
What was the supposed first assumption?
The only book you have mentioned is PGA 5e version. You have not mentioned the c&c version having such a rule at all, suggesting either it does not have the rule, or that you don't know.
The only major change thay've ever made was to the barbarian, in the 4th printing i think. And they also changed illusionist spells / healing and all that (don't get me started on that! ). But they've never changed a core mechanic or the premise of the Siege engine. Only if the core rules change is a new edition justified.
Oh, i've made lots of tweaks to my game- heck i use entirely different magic systems, changes to combat, and others. I like flexibility and customized classes too, so i understand your desire. But i don't ever want to do anything that results in diminishing a class.And if y'all want to limit your games to what's in the PHB and M&T, it's your game. But I think the Trolls publish materials for a reason, and there's nothing wrong with using what they've published.
-Fizz
Re: Characters using other class abilities
Or was he just an agile and skillful fighter?
Did he climb completely-sheer walls? Move absolutely silently? Vanish in shadows?
Re: Characters using other class abilities
That appendix F of PGA was written just to entice 5e-ers to try C&C.
They completely reworked the saving throw system. I've read in some older forum posts that there was a Mental and a Physical save?Fizz wrote: ↑Sun Mar 12, 2023 12:55 amThe only major change thay've ever made was to the barbarian, in the 4th printing i think. And they also changed illusionist spells / healing and all that (don't get me started on that! ). But they've never changed a core mechanic or the premise of the Siege engine. Only if the core rules change is a new edition justified.
And I seem to recall different armor classes too. Aren't those "core rules"?
I don't see it as "diminishing" anything. I see it as a means for a character to have a few abilities that can distinguish him/her from other members of the class. The rogue's class abilities are still unsurpassed. Oh, and according to the PGA, rogues, bards and assassins get more skills than anyone, so they can gain some serious "other skills" as well. Yes, a rogue can track, just not as well as a ranger.Fizz wrote: ↑Sun Mar 12, 2023 12:55 amOh, i've made lots of tweaks to my game- heck i use entirely different magic systems, changes to combat, and others. I like flexibility and customized classes too, so i understand your desire. But i don't ever want to do anything that results in diminishing a class.
But by all means, you do you!
- Go0gleplex
- Greater Lore Drake
- Posts: 4065
- Joined: Fri May 30, 2008 7:00 am
- Location: Keizer, OR
Re: Characters using other class abilities
Simple point of fact. The difference between Rogue's skills vs anyone trying them is TRAINING!!!
To bring a real world context into this; Russia is learning this at a heinous cost. Anyone can be put in uniform. Anyone can be handed a weapon. Anyone can be sent to a battle field. However...how effective they are once there and how well they utilize the tools in hand and manage the conditions around them to survive....boils down to TRAINING!
I can climb a rock face free style...(or could when younger and in better shape), then we had a bit of training from instructors that had been on Canada's Olympic Team for a couple weeks and were able to climb tougher faces, including from under outcrops where we were literally hanging upside down and feeling for holds.
Now back to game land; Just anyone cannot attempt magic because they first have to learn how to feel their mana or the language of magic in order to cast spells...then learn the proper inflections of tone and cadence when reciting the spell plus what the proper components are, if necessary...again; TRAINING! There's a reason that wizards were older as starting characters in OD&D, 1e, and 2e. It took them longer to learn magic than a thief did to learn sneakiness, deceit, and such.
Most people attempting to pick someone's pockets without training were caught almost immediately, the most successful, albeit an abysmally small percentage, were cut purses rather than pick pockets. (and YES, there was a difference between the two!)
If you really cannot recognize such a simple fact as how essential training actually is for the majority of skills and abilities in life...congratulations! You've graduated to Politician!
Conan...heh! I remember the original published D&D stats for him from Supplement IV back in 76-77. Original Text by Ward & Kuntz:
CONAN
Armor Class — As a normal man Alignment: Neutral
Move: 12" Magic Ability: None
Hit Points: 117 Fighter Ability: 15th Level
Strength: 18; Exceptional Strength: 100%; Intelligence: 16; Wisdom: 10; Constitution: 17; Dexterity:
18; Charisma: 15.
This mighty fighter of the 15th level also has thieving abilities of a 9th level thief as per
Greyhawk. His animal instincts make it almost impossible to surprise him (roll of "1" on 12-
sided dice) and his unusually keen perception allows only the most clever of traps to entangle
him. With the new Greyhawk rules he receives a plus 4 on hit probability and a plus 6 on the
damage he does. He opens all doors, and wizard-locked ones on a roll of 1-3, his thief abilities
allow him to open locks 75% of the time, remove traps 70% of the time, pick pockets and move
silently 75% of the time and hide in shadows 65% of the time.
An interesting article here...https://skullsinthestars.com/2019/08/31 ... ns-part-6/
Magic Realms was my first D&D type game purchased ( a compromise from my parents who were on the D&D=Satanism wagon at the time). But also some later stats for Conan.
To bring a real world context into this; Russia is learning this at a heinous cost. Anyone can be put in uniform. Anyone can be handed a weapon. Anyone can be sent to a battle field. However...how effective they are once there and how well they utilize the tools in hand and manage the conditions around them to survive....boils down to TRAINING!
I can climb a rock face free style...(or could when younger and in better shape), then we had a bit of training from instructors that had been on Canada's Olympic Team for a couple weeks and were able to climb tougher faces, including from under outcrops where we were literally hanging upside down and feeling for holds.
Now back to game land; Just anyone cannot attempt magic because they first have to learn how to feel their mana or the language of magic in order to cast spells...then learn the proper inflections of tone and cadence when reciting the spell plus what the proper components are, if necessary...again; TRAINING! There's a reason that wizards were older as starting characters in OD&D, 1e, and 2e. It took them longer to learn magic than a thief did to learn sneakiness, deceit, and such.
Most people attempting to pick someone's pockets without training were caught almost immediately, the most successful, albeit an abysmally small percentage, were cut purses rather than pick pockets. (and YES, there was a difference between the two!)
If you really cannot recognize such a simple fact as how essential training actually is for the majority of skills and abilities in life...congratulations! You've graduated to Politician!
Conan...heh! I remember the original published D&D stats for him from Supplement IV back in 76-77. Original Text by Ward & Kuntz:
CONAN
Armor Class — As a normal man Alignment: Neutral
Move: 12" Magic Ability: None
Hit Points: 117 Fighter Ability: 15th Level
Strength: 18; Exceptional Strength: 100%; Intelligence: 16; Wisdom: 10; Constitution: 17; Dexterity:
18; Charisma: 15.
This mighty fighter of the 15th level also has thieving abilities of a 9th level thief as per
Greyhawk. His animal instincts make it almost impossible to surprise him (roll of "1" on 12-
sided dice) and his unusually keen perception allows only the most clever of traps to entangle
him. With the new Greyhawk rules he receives a plus 4 on hit probability and a plus 6 on the
damage he does. He opens all doors, and wizard-locked ones on a roll of 1-3, his thief abilities
allow him to open locks 75% of the time, remove traps 70% of the time, pick pockets and move
silently 75% of the time and hide in shadows 65% of the time.
An interesting article here...https://skullsinthestars.com/2019/08/31 ... ns-part-6/
Magic Realms was my first D&D type game purchased ( a compromise from my parents who were on the D&D=Satanism wagon at the time). But also some later stats for Conan.
"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
I'm not disagreeing with what you're saying. For the 3rd or 4th time, yes, rogues should be supreme when it comes to their class abilities, and no one comes close. But can a dexterous fighter try to do something rogue-ish? Yes. Will s/he fail? Likely yes. But if the same fighter has had some sort of training in stealth, climbing, etc., should s/he not have a better chance?Go0gleplex wrote: ↑Sun Mar 12, 2023 3:00 amSimple point of fact. The difference between Rogue's skills vs anyone trying them is TRAINING!!!
To bring a real world context into this; Russia is learning this at a heinous cost. Anyone can be put in uniform. Anyone can be handed a weapon. Anyone can be sent to a battle field. However...how effective they are once there and how well they utilize the tools in hand and manage the conditions around them to survive....boils down to TRAINING!
I can climb a rock face free style...(or could when younger and in better shape), then we had a bit of training from instructors that had been on Canada's Olympic Team for a couple weeks and were able to climb tougher faces, including from under outcrops where we were literally hanging upside down and feeling for holds.
Now back to game land; Just anyone cannot attempt magic because they first have to learn how to feel their mana or the language of magic in order to cast spells...then learn the proper inflections of tone and cadence when reciting the spell plus what the proper components are, if necessary...again; TRAINING! There's a reason that wizards were older as starting characters in OD&D, 1e, and 2e. It took them longer to learn magic than a thief did to learn sneakiness, deceit, and such.
Most people attempting to pick someone's pockets without training were caught almost immediately, the most successful, albeit an abysmally small percentage, were cut purses rather than pick pockets. (and YES, there was a difference between the two!)
If you really cannot recognize such a simple fact as how essential training actually is for the majority of skills and abilities in life...congratulations! You've graduated to Politician!
Conan...heh! I remember the original published D&D stats for him from Supplement IV back in 76-77. Original Text by Ward & Kuntz:
CONAN
Armor Class — As a normal man Alignment: Neutral
Move: 12" Magic Ability: None
Hit Points: 117 Fighter Ability: 15th Level
Strength: 18; Exceptional Strength: 100%; Intelligence: 16; Wisdom: 10; Constitution: 17; Dexterity:
18; Charisma: 15.
This mighty fighter of the 15th level also has thieving abilities of a 9th level thief as per
Greyhawk. His animal instincts make it almost impossible to surprise him (roll of "1" on 12-
sided dice) and his unusually keen perception allows only the most clever of traps to entangle
him. With the new Greyhawk rules he receives a plus 4 on hit probability and a plus 6 on the
damage he does. He opens all doors, and wizard-locked ones on a roll of 1-3, his thief abilities
allow him to open locks 75% of the time, remove traps 70% of the time, pick pockets and move
silently 75% of the time and hide in shadows 65% of the time.
An interesting article here...https://skullsinthestars.com/2019/08/31 ... ns-part-6/
Magic Realms was my first D&D type game purchased ( a compromise from my parents who were on the D&D=Satanism wagon at the time). But also some later stats for Conan.
For magic use, it's not just a matter of training; it's a matter of aptitude. If you don't have it, you don't have it, and you can't train to get it.
As for Conan, I repeat my questions. How/did Conan do climbing a completely sheer wall? How did he do moving with complete silence, or vanishing in shadows? Are there examples from the literature? I have no problem thinking of Conan as a highly-dexterous fighter, likely with some rogue-ish skills; but he's not a rogue
A very simple skill system is a good way for characters to gain Modest ability in some things without having to multiclass. Or class+, or class-and-a-half, or whatever.
Re: Characters using other class abilities
See Go0gleplex's post where he's discussed it with the trolls. It seems to be exactly the case. The Trolls make products to make money.
No, saving throws have not changed. I had the 1st printing of C&C, and i am certain that saving throws have always functioned as they currently do. A mental save just means one of Int, Wis or Cha, and a physical save is one of Str, Dex or Con. Monster saves are either physical or mental, as they do not have defined attributes- that's never changed. AC has always worked the same way as well. Is it possible that they changed the AC value of a specific armor or two, yes, but that's not a core rule change.They completely reworked the saving throw system. I've read in some older forum posts that there was a Mental and a Physical save?
And I seem to recall different armor classes too. Aren't those "core rules"?
It is diminishment if it's a one-way street. If a wizard can do some thief things (even if not as effective), but a thief can not do wizard things at all, that's an inhernetly unfair tradeoff. You claim you want to follow "anyone can attempt anything", but you're not permitting it.I don't see it as "diminishing" anything. I see it as a means for a character to have a few abilities that can distinguish him/her from other members of the class. The rogue's class abilities are still unsurpassed. Oh, and according to the PGA, rogues, bards and assassins get more skills than anyone, so they can gain some serious "other skills" as well. Yes, a rogue can track, just not as well as a ranger.
-Fizz
Re: Characters using other class abilities
And why is aptitude unique to magic casters? Indeed, as most npc's in the world are classless, one could make the case that every class requires a special aptitude.
Anyone can climb anything with sufficient handholds or support. And maybe some characters have a small bonus as you describe. But climbing a sheer wall with no tools is a special ability, and only thieves (and rangers since they have Scale) can do it. Only they have the aptitude for it.
I am not sufficiently familiar with the novels, but in C&C terms, he'd have to be multi- or dual-classed. Maybe in a different gaming system he'd just be single class barbarian. 1st ed barbarian might have had climbing skills, now that i i think about it, will have to look that up. Edit- looked it up, and yes one of the primary abilities of the 1st ed barbarian was the ability to climb natural sheer cliffs at the same level of ability as a thief.As for Conan, I repeat my questions. How/did Conan do climbing a completely sheer wall? How did he do moving with complete silence, or vanishing in shadows? Are there examples from the literature? I have no problem thinking of Conan as a highly-dexterous fighter, likely with some rogue-ish skills; but he's not a rogue
-Fizz
Re: Characters using other class abilities
But that's not what the text says. You guys are reading your assumptions and preferences into what it says.
Have you ever actually read it?
They have gone from 2 saves to 6. I actually prefer the 6-saves. But this Is a core-rule change. And evidently there was a "head AC", etc. at one point. Again, core-rule change.Fizz wrote: ↑Sun Mar 12, 2023 3:13 amNo, saving throws have not changed. I had the 1st printing of C&C, and i am 90% sure that saving throws have always functioned as they currently do. A mental save just means one of Int, Wis or Cha, and a physical save is one of Str, Dex or Con. AC has always worked the same way as well. Is it possible that they changed the AC value of a specific armor or two, yes, but that's not a core rule change.
Just to stir the pot some more, PGA also discusses using feats (!) in C&C. But then, the CKG already allows for "advantages", which are the same thing. Do you accept "advantages" in your game, even though they weren't in the PHB or M&T? They are definitely a 3e/5e thing, so doesn't that make them anathema? Do you toss out the CKG?
Re: Characters using other class abilities
I believe Go0gleplex said that he has actually discussed this with the Trolls. So it's not any assumption for him- it's what he's been told by the Trolls directly. But he can clarify better than I can.
PGA 5e was written for 5e players, so why is it surprising they make a plug for C&C? If you're referring to the text that says "C&C fans", that still sounds like part of the plug to get people to try it without sounding pushy. I read it as a gentle hint to 5e fans. You can't exactly write a book directed at 5e players just to outright tell them their system isn't good, can you?
Neither of these is true. Here is a review of the 1st printing whitebox from 2004 that includes discussion about 6 saves. https://www.rpg.net/reviews/archive/11/11008.phtml (Aside, i love the preamble.)They have gone from 2 saves to 6. I actually prefer the 6-saves. But this Is a core-rule change. And evidently there was a "head AC", etc. at one point. Again, core-rule change.
The current PH discusses how an unarmored head is AC10 + dex bonus, unless a helm is worn, in the Combat section. Again, i don't think this has changed, and even if it had it's certainly not a change to the core mechanics.
I have mixed thoughts with feats / advantages. I like that they can bring some background flavor to a character. But when overdone they can outshine class abilities and lead to power-gaming as they did with 3e. Advantages may be related to feats, but they are not as overdone.Just to stir the pot some more, PGA also discusses using feats (!) in C&C. But then, the CKG already allows for "advantages", which are the same thing. Do you accept "advantages" in your game, even though they weren't in the PHB or M&T? They are definitely a 3e/5e thing, so doesn't that make them anathema? Do you toss out the CKG?
I don't use them directly. I have played around with some simple benefits that can be picked at first level, all class neutral, but it's mostly been an afterthought.
Note i don't have an issue with alternative rules. As i said previously, i'm just sticking up for thieves (when i say 'thief', i mean any class that is heavily attribute-based).
-Fizz
Re: Characters using other class abilities
Presumably, if they've been training in that they didn't have time to train in combat, so they should give up a +1 to hit or something. Actually, in older versions of the game it cost XP to learn such things, so my comment is not without precedent.paladinn wrote: ↑Sun Mar 12, 2023 3:09 amI'm not disagreeing with what you're saying. For the 3rd or 4th time, yes, rogues should be supreme when it comes to their class abilities, and no one comes close. But can a dexterous fighter try to do something rogue-ish? Yes. Will s/he fail? Likely yes. But if the same fighter has had some sort of training in stealth, climbing, etc., should s/he not have a better chance?
To answer your question, if circumstances deem such a check, they could have a small bonus at something they could already attempt, yes. But they should continue to have no chance to emulate the extraordinary abilities of another class.
Could your fighter have a climb bonus that helps him when climbing up a wet slippery tree, or using a grappling hook and rope? Yes. Anyone can attempt to climb those things, he's just a tad better. But could the fighter get a bonus and let him climb a sheer wall without any tools? No- only thieves can do that. In fact, read the description of Climb: it specifically says it permits the thief to climb things others would find impossible. "Impossible" it says, that means 0% chance.
Could your fighter be get a bonus to have a better chance at moving quietly? Yes. Everyone has tried to move quietly at some point, to avoid waking someone, or not to disturb a movie, etc. But could he ever move absolutely silently with no chance of being heard? No. In fact, that example is given in the PH, and even if the fighter has a successful check, anyone nearby still has a chance to hear him with a Wis check.
Hide is a bit more confusing. Anyone can jump behind a curtain, so i don't know why that would ever require a check. Maybe it accounts for people not realizing that their feet can still be seen? So maybe you could justify a small bonus here too. But to become essentially invisible, even when there is no cover, blending into the background, that requires proper thief training.
In other words, your proposed bonuses should not give the character carte blanche to attempt anything that only the emulated class could do. If the CK deems anyone could try it, the character can apply their small bonus. But it does not mean that they can always attempt it.
True thief (or assassin or ranger etc) abilities should always leave others wondering "How the hell did they do that?"
-Fizz
Re: Characters using other class abilities
Think your points of view are clear and cannot find a meeting point.
I am somewhat in the middle.
I think anyway that the argument "so a thief can make spells Just watching a wizard" Is absolutely nonsense and Just for argumenting.
No One can be a Jedi Just observing Obi-Wan waving his hand (unless you are Rey, but that s bad Fanfiction bwhahaha).
I am somewhat in the middle.
I think anyway that the argument "so a thief can make spells Just watching a wizard" Is absolutely nonsense and Just for argumenting.
No One can be a Jedi Just observing Obi-Wan waving his hand (unless you are Rey, but that s bad Fanfiction bwhahaha).