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

Once you go C&C, you never go back

After you tried Castles & Crusades, did you switch to it?

  • Yes.

    Votes: 55 24.9%
  • No.

    Votes: 123 55.7%
  • Liked it, but not enough to switch.

    Votes: 43 19.5%

Frost

First Post
It seems like whenever someone posts about Troll Lord Games' Castle & Crusades game, it's very positive. Something along the lines of, "That's why I switched to C&C," or "Once I played C&C, I instantly feel in love with it."

Has anyone played it and not liked it?

Edit: How the heck to edit the poll? I'd like to add an "I now play both" option.
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad


SteveC

Doing the best imitation of myself
Uh no. I've played C&C...even did a demo game with the Troll Lord guys (who are fantastic, by the way). I really like the SIEGE engine mechanic...it's very nice. The rest of the game, no way. Been there, done that...got the T-shirt.

I stay out of debates on the issue, because I don't really have much to add, but also because the guys behind the game are so darn nice. Frankly, I think that's why you don't see a lot more criticism of the game: while some of the game's defenders can be argumentative at times, the actual authors are professional, and nice people to boot!

But no, it's not the game for me.

--Steve
 


Tried it.
Liked it.
Switched to it for my main game.
Still play it, but it's heavily house-ruled; at this point my C&C game might as well be AD&D. (And it's no longer my "first choice" system -- OD&D[1974] has usurped that position.)
Still think it's a great game, in any case.
 
Last edited:

Wormwood

Adventurer
Tried it, thought it achieved the goals it set for itself, and never played it again.

When I wanted to run a simple, easy-to-learn D&D game for my wife and nephews, C&C never even crossed my mind.

(Thankfully, my old Moldvay Basic set came to the rescue and we had a great time!)
 

diaglo

Adventurer
Philotomy Jurament said:
Tried it.
Liked it.
Switched to it for my main game.
Still play it, but it's heavily house-ruled; at this point my C&C game might as well be AD&D. (And it's no longer my "first choice" system -- OD&D[1974] has usurped that position.)

i could've told you.

diaglo "the cassandra of rpgs" Ooi
 

Buttercup

Princess of Florin
Obryn just kindly gave me his books, because he didn't want them. I've yet to run a C&C game, but I sure would like to.

Probably I would houserule it a tiny bit, like take out the Monk, use 4d6 drop the lowest for stat generation and *maybe* use that class based die roll for damage so that weapon choice became a story element rather than an actual mechanical choice.

And of course in my game there will be no elves.
 

Ulrick

First Post
I bought it and really liked it at first (despite the spelling errors in the PHB). But then I figured, "this is a lot like AD&D, so why don't I just play 1st Edition AD&D?"

One thing that I didn't like about C&C was the test resolution system where you needed two numbers depending on if a character specialized in an attribute.

But it was a nice rules-lite d20 system, compatible with both old and new D&D products.
 

Odhanan

Adventurer
Frost said:
Has anyone played it and not liked it?

Where's the option for "I play it happily, just like I play other editions just as happily"? I'm actually considering building my own "AC&C" for old school gaming right now.

I really like it but still would/will run games with Third Ed too. I am satisfied by both but they provide different kinds of fun. Nothing wrong with that. So I voted "Yes".
 
Last edited:

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top