[C&C] Holy Smokes ... I'm REALLY Impressed!

[Vocenoctum]

Nothing against all the C&C love, but could you at least put "C&C" somewhere in the thread title, so that those like me with no interest in the subject don't click on the thread by accident?

 

[rounser]

could you at least put "C&C" somewhere in the thread title

Try hovering your cursor over the thread title for a preview if the thread title doesn't tell you enough. That way you won't be so inconvenienced.

I don't really get why you'd want to avoid such threads though; all just variations on the D&D theme isn't it?

 

[Belen]

That's really just amazingly sad. It still surprises me to this day how poorly run and criminally inadequate some hobby shops are.

This is not the fault of the hobby shop. It is the fault of gamers. If so many did not buy items off the internet and actually spent money in the stores, then maybe they would carry a better selection. The owners have to make rent money and they will not be able to do that if they buy a lot of books that won't sell. I had my FLGS buy the C&C books when they came out. They did not sell for a year until they went into the bargain bin.

So blame gamers not the stores. They need to buy product that moves.

 

[ShinHakkaider]

I don't really get why you'd want to avoid such threads though; all just variations on the D&D theme isn't it?

I can't speak for him but posts like this is why I usually tend to avoid threads about C&C and avoid the game in general...

The feel is completely different, too. Whenever I play d20 System (Fantasy) I feel like I'm trying to emulate a freaking videogame. C&C brings back the classic, epic feel of the game as an adventure.

The system really puts a lot of control back in the hands of the judge, rather than in the rulebook. "Rule 0" in d20 System was always kind of a joke in practice; in C&C, it's the only rule that matters.

It's entirely possible to tell people what you like about one system without bashing another.

 

[Dragonhelm]

I can't speak for him but posts like this is why I usually tend to avoid threads about C&C and avoid the game in general...

Perhaps the moderators would be so kind as to change the thread title.

It's entirely possible to tell people what you like about one system without bashing another.

Agreed. I can see comparison and contrasting. But it's often too true that fans of any system feel the need to bash other systems to somehow make their argument. C&C diehards often put down d20, d20 diehards often put down AD&D, and so on and so forth. If people would just realize that different systems work for different people, live and let live, then I think that RPG fandom in general would be so much better off.

Okay, I'll step down from my soapbox now.

 

[S'mon]

It's entirely possible to tell people what you like about one system without bashing another.

I think it's actually extremely difficult to do so re C&C, because what we like about C&C is basically that it's not 3e - that it uses a simple structure derived from 3e/d20, but gets rid of most of 3e's complexity and re-empowers the GM to an almost 1e level. Many fans of 3e strongly like the complexity and the player empowerment, and see comments by others about how they dislike these as antagonistic. My own opinion of 3e now is that it's a great game and I enjoy playing it but I find GMing it takes too much effort for me. The C&C session I ran yesterday, the first full C&C session of my rejigged ex-3e campaign, it was the first time in years I've finished GMing a session and _not felt tired_ afterwards. I'm sorry if you find such comments offensive, but the fact is that C&C is not immensely new, or creative. Its attraction is very much in it being D&D (essentially) but not 3e D&D.

 

[S'mon]

C&C diehards often put down d20

Which is a bit silly because C&C is a d20-system based ruleset.

 

[ShinHakkaider]

I'm sorry if you find such comments offensive, but the fact is that C&C is not immensely new, or creative. Its attraction is very much in it being D&D (essentially) but not 3e D&D.

It's not that I find it offensive, but it is a turn off for me to WANT to listen to someone praise a new game but have then do so by bashing another game that I like. I want to hear what's good about the game but if you can't do that without bashing something else then maybe the game isnt as good as they think it is and even if it is, if this seems to be a common pattern (the bashing I mean), would I even want to play the new game with people like that? I had this same issue with M&M vs. Hero / Champions. M&M is a great systems despite some of the issues I have with it, but I'll probably never run it again partially because of rules issues but partially because of the need of some of it's more vocal proponents to bash Hero system at every turn.

That said the art by Peter Bradely for the C&C books is very good and he should definitely branch out. Maybe do some work for Goodman games or (gasp) WOTC? I have access to a friends copy of C&C, he doesnt really care for it as a whole (and neither do I) but can see how some people who want a more inherently streamlined game might.

 

[Breakdaddy]

I'm glad you discovered C&C, and I agree with your points. I love the game and am fortunate enough to have a bi-weekly local C&C game to referee. I have hacked the system to pieces adding backgrounds, bonuses and class changes left and right and the game still runs as smoothly as it did before I started mangling the system to pieces. The guys playing in my game are having a good time with it, and so am I.

 

[Talath]

It's not that I find it offensive, but it is a turn off for me to WANT to listen to someone praise a new game but have then do so by bashing another game that I like. I want to hear what's good about the game but if you can't do that without bashing something else then maybe the game isnt as good as they think it is and even if it is, if this seems to be a common pattern (the bashing I mean), would I even want to play the new game with people like that? I had this same issue with M&M vs. Hero / Champions. M&M is a great systems despite some of the issues I have with it, but I'll probably never run it again partially because of rules issues but partially because of the need of some of it's more vocal proponents to bash Hero system at every turn.

That said the art by Peter Bradely for the C&C books is very good and he should definitely branch out. Maybe do some work for Goodman games or (gasp) WOTC? I have access to a friends copy of C&C, he doesnt really care for it as a whole (and neither do I) but can see how some people who want a more inherently streamlined game might.

I like C&C because it combines the sleekness of 3rd edition mechanics with the feel of 1st edition D&D. That, to me, is a winner no matter how you slice it.