True 20 vs Castles and Crusades

I have heard a lot about both True 20 and Castles & Crusades and was wondering which is the better, well rounded system. They both seem to be simplified d20 systems, but C&C boasts that it is compatible with not only 3.x D&D but older versions of D&D as well. Another things I am wondering about is the learning curve, again both claim to be very easy but if I need to teach it to a beginner which would be the preferred system?
Just looking for a few opinions from people more familiar with the systems that I am.

To sum it up with a vast oversimplification that will likely draw ire from both sides:

I'd say that gameplay in True20 is easier because it's more well-rounded, while the C&C gameplay is straightforward but can seem arbitrary, with so much left to GM fiat. From the player perspective, what you have to know is about the same, but the level of consistency is better with True20 (given an average GM).

I'd say that character creation is arguably a bit more complex in True20, which is bad for new players but good for people who don't want to conform to a broad archtype.

For novice players, I think either system could be fine. If you plan to run a lot of old-school dungeon-hack modules, C&C is probably right for you. If you plan to run something broader and don't plan to use a lot of 1E material, I'd go with True20.

This thread might prove useful in explaining True20:

http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=170927

Capt. D said:

I have heard a lot about both True 20 and Castles & Crusades and was wondering which is the better, well rounded system. They both seem to be simplified d20 systems, but C&C boasts that it is compatible with not only 3.x D&D but older versions of D&D as well. Another things I am wondering about is the learning curve, again both claim to be very easy but if I need to teach it to a beginner which would be the preferred system?
Just looking for a few opinions from people more familiar with the systems that I am.

Click to expand...

I have both. My preference is slighty toward True20, mostly because it allows character customization, and that wounded characters suffer penalties to being wounded. On the other hand, C&C plays easier, and is 95% compatible with AD&D stuff, which is a great thing (while almost nothing d20 is compatible with True20 without work). What I don't like with C&C is the lack of customization and d20-like multiclassing. Also, True20 allows for some different types of campaigns outside of the sacred cows (paladins, clerics, monks, etc.) that C&C supports entirely.

They're completely different games, with notably different design goals (well, other than perhaps streamlined play).

I won't go repeating myself from the other thread here with True20 and C&C in it, but suffice it to say that C&C is oldschool (more like a 1e/3e hybrid, to some extent, though more 1e) and True20 is the way of the future.

The future is now.

Heh. Only, I'm not part of the Green Ronin team (I hope that was apparent ), so I'll just say that - to my mind - these games both achieved their respective goals, and rather well at that.


For a beginner, either would be an excellent choice. And it might prove to be appealing for more experienced groups, too.

Turanil said:

I have both. My preference is slighty toward True20, mostly because it allows character customization, and that wounded characters suffer penalties to being wounded. On the other hand, C&C plays easier, and is 95% compatible with AD&D stuff, which is a great thing (while almost nothing d20 is compatible with True20 without work). What I don't like with C&C is the lack of customization and d20-like multiclassing. Also, True20 allows for some different types of campaigns outside of the sacred cows (paladins, clerics, monks, etc.) that C&C supports entirely.

Click to expand...

I agree with everything Turanil said, except for his slight preference -- ceteris paribus, I'm completely neutral between True20 and C&C. Which system I prefer depends entirely on the kind of game I want to run.

If you're interested, I've written a review of C&C here:
http://www.rpg.net/reviews/archive/10/10797.phtml