• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

Castle & Crusades - who has tried it stuck with it?

S'mon

Legend
As the other thread said, this in no way is meant to start a flame war; I'm just genuinely curious if people have been exposed to C&C and (like me) have dropped 3e to focus exclusively on C&C, at least for GMing.

What were your reasons? Ease of adapting old stuff? Prep speed? Flavour?

What does the system do for you that 3e doesn't? Do you run it as-written? Have you house-ruled C&C, maybe to bring in bits of 3e?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

trollwad

First Post
Yes.

It is easy to house rule and I strongly encourage it.

Just keep house ruling simple in the spirit of C&C. For example:

20 very simplified feats from 3e
Allow cleave and power attack for any pcs with strength primes and two-handed weapons
Weapon specialization/mastery from Rules Compendium and 1e Arcana Unearthed
Set a massive damage threshhold=con score like Omega World (?)
Open-ended damage for certain very vulnerable situations (e.g. casting in melee, fleeing combat, grappling an armed foe)
Adopted Mind Witch class (slightly weakened) from Monte Cook's game
Made up (simple) rules for grappling, out of turn dodge and evade, and covering up shield
Created specialty priests similar to 2e by deity (using mostly Greyhawk deities)
Used the starting social class rules (elaborated upon) from the Gygax' Yggsburgh book
Tweaked the C&C barbarian class with a couple of features from Conan and 1E
Added 100 spells from past editions and Monte Cook's game
Will probably add tweaked 4e rules on different abilities with different specialized weapons

Anyways, my goal has basically been to have a game that is: 1) very simple at its core so that you could explain the essence to a 10 year old in 15 minutes and 2) has a customization flavor for each player based on the good (simple) ideas and classes from a variety of sources over the past twenty years. Simple, open ended continuously tweakable or evolveable.

Lets discuss feats as an example. If 3.5e has hundreds of feats, some of which are complex or esoteric that can be easily daisy chained to destroy game balance, then I want to do the 80:20 rule by grabbing the 20 or so shortest but most practical or interesting ones that allow people to customize their characters but don't daisy chain much. Here are seven examples of flavorful feats that aren't too complex or crazily daisy chainable with each other:

Slippery Mind (get a second save vs. mind and emotional control one round later). Make a cha prime the prerequisite to select.

Great Fervour (wis prime prerequisite; reroll one save per day if an extremely devout pc verbally invokes his deity for aid).

Weak Spot or Bullseye feat (wis and dex prime prerequisites; if you are unencumbered and spend one round observing a humanoid or animal and you make a successful wis check with opposed levels, you discern a weak spot in that foe and you do open-ended damage with a thrown weapon with which you are specialized).

Ambidexterity (dex prime prerequisite, cut penalty with two weapon fighting in half)

Finesse Attack (dex prime or int prime prerequisite; use either or both your int mod or dex mod for to hit and damage bonuses in melee rather than your str bonus with a dagger or short sword with which you are specialized).

Roll With The Blow (prerequisite: dex prime, if you have open space behind you and you make a successful dex check, you take half damage from all bludgeoning attacks if you can roll backwards 5' per each ten points of damage avoided; you also treat falls for which you are prepared as if they were from 10' less distance).

Out of Turn Evade (prerequisite dex prime, prior to the time that the foe rolls his to hit dice against you, you may forego your action in the round if you haven't already gone and it is not a surprise or sneak attack, and you gain a +5 to AC vs. all attacks from that one foe or a +5 on your save vs. the breath weapon or magical attack that has a dex related save from that one foe).

You can find some of my tweaks and other people's ideas on the Troll Lords website forums Under The Rules and The Chaos and on the Dragonsfoot Boards under the C&C forums.
 

FATDRAGONGAMES

First Post
The group I DM switched our campaign to C&C last year and are still with it. We're getting near the end of the campaign and I do not know what rules we will be using for the next game. I also run a Labyrinth Lord game for my son and his friends and I really like the system. In addition to those games, I play in a 3.5 group that tried C&C but chose to stay with 3.5 (that group is changing to 4E next summer, the DM has already begun trying for a TPK to end the campaign).
 

tzor

First Post
I got it at the last Gen Con along with Gygax's module. I haven't run any games with it so far but I've used it as inspiration for the last NaNoWriMo I was making. In many ways the game is very simple. The layout is reasonable, and the use of two books intstead of three (Player's book and Monsters & Treasure) is easier, but most gamers will have to look through the book twice or three times to be sure that a rule or two really isn't in the book because combat is at the very end of the book.
 

Odhanan

Adventurer
Me. I love 3.5 and other d20 games, but at the moment, I want my D&D to come back to the roots.

I'm using C&C on the player's side of the screen and AD&D 1E on my side as the bases to achieve that. I intend to tweak the system progressively using my own stuff or various concepts from various editions and variants (I'm thinking Saga, Iron Heroes, Lejendary Adventures and such) to get what I really want out of the game, a bit like trollwad's doing. Build my Advanced Castles & Crusades.

What were your reasons? Ease of adapting old stuff? Prep speed? Flavour?

Flavor is First Ed's. The reason to use C&C and not straight AD&D is to keep smooth, easy to learn mechanics on the players' side. You can create a character in 10 minutes and you don't have much to understand system-wise. You can jump into the adventure right away. The relative ease of use of game materials from any edition of the game is a big plus to me as well. I don't want to trash the tradition of the game; I want to embrace it more than ever.

What does the system do for you that 3e doesn't? Do you run it as-written? Have you house-ruled C&C, maybe to bring in bits of 3e?

3e is sometimes too needlessly picky on the interactions of its own rules, systems, sub-systems, exceptions and particular cases, all of that in a vacuum of "RAW". If you like the rules themselves that's fine to some extent, but nitpicking about things that in the end do not matter, should not matter, and even hinder the sense of make-believe at the game table (like redefining what type of action goes when, or what creates an AOO or not, or if you can do this or that when you don't have the feat) is, in the end, a needless waste of time and resources.
 
Last edited:

VictorC

Explorer
I tried it and found all the claims that people made to be overblown. It does not do everything that 3.5 does, not even close. It, in my opinion, is no easier to houserule then any other system. It just falls well short of the "rules light fantasy" everybody claims it to be.

However, don't get me wrong. I am very glad that it does all these things and more for the people who like it.
 


danbuter1

First Post
It's my favorite iteration of d20. But I really wish I could make a couple changes to the base rules as published, instead of my small stack of houserules. ;)
 

seskis281

First Post
I converted to C&C as the core basis of my gaming about three years ago. I had played 3.0 and enjoyed it initially, although in my case I was house-ruling down to streamline it.

What I like most is that it is a hybrid, filling the niche of my tastes in terms of a more unified mechanic like 3.0 but with a number of earlier 1e feels, tropes and concepts. In short, for me it was the in-between that I was looking for. I do adjust and house rule, but I find C&C to be better designed FOR house ruling, and I never want to GM a game where 20-30 minutes can go by while players thumb through 9-10 varying rulebooks to tell me why I'm wrong. To me, C&C made it easier to prepare and to enjoy the game itself again...

... which isn't to knock anyone who prefers a 3.x game or any other - it's just a matter of tastes.

My thanks to the OP for setting up the thread nicely to remind us we can discuss our interests in different systems without starting a flame war. Hope the thread stays productive! :cool:
 

Turanil

First Post
I dropped d20 to focus on C&C, although I wouldn't mind to also play/run True20 and Savage Worlds too. I houseruled C&C in adding back simplified feats/proficiencies, a few new classes, clarifications on Siege checks, action and fate points, etc.
 

Remove ads

Top