Once you go C&C, you never go back

[gideon_thorne]

Even though the whole thing's now being "co-written" by a team of freelancers?

This is also incorrect.

Gary is working directly with one, I repeat one, co author on the Castle Zagyg dungeon material. His name is already quite clearly and prominently displayed on the CZ Eastmark Folio.

The further development of the Yggsburgh city modules, overseen by Gary at his instigation mind, were done with a team of about a dozen or so people I think. Note the word 'done'. The bulk of that writing is also finished, and has been for a while, and the modules themselves are being released a bit at a time as the publishing schedules permits..

Expecting a single person to write all that, even back in the day, is nuts. ^_~`

Even AD&D wasn't written in a vacume. There were other people around who did a bit here and there. ^_~`

 

[Valiant]

Gary Gygax has made it abundantly clear that he only does what he wants to do. Being paid doesn't change that, and is a little bit insulting to indicate that it does.

I said: -As for Gygax and his association with C&C, my understanding is that he is payed for his association, and in return the Troll Lords get the benefit of his name associated with their product.-


Gygax is paid by TLG, that is a fact. Would he support C&C on its own merits? I have no reason to think otherwise. Is he good friends with the Trolls, again, I think he is. Would he work for something he didn't believe in for money...from what I know of the man, NO.

But none of that was my point. My point was that the Trolls are benefiting from his name and association by tying C&C to AD&D and OD&D (the games he created and co-created).
It might appear to some unfamiliar with the game (given Gygax's involvement) that C&C is the natural progression of Gygaxian D&D, and I don't think it is (no more then 3E or 2E).

The fact that Gary is paid by the Trolls was not a slam on Gygax or a question of his character, it was simply a statement of fact (infact I'm very happy for him and his family, its great he's able to continue working in the field he created, and bravo for the Trolls for helping him do so. I believe Gygax hangs his shingle with TLG and C&C for all the reasons Gideon mentioned, but money likely comes into play as well (if for no other reason than thats his publishing base). Its not known if Gygax would have gone whole hog into using C&C as his system of choice for publishing if he wasn't financially tied to TLG (personaly I doubt it, he'd likely continue with LA).

Another question I posed was this: Would C&C have sold as many books as it did without Gygax's name involved, I doubt it. Gygax's name added alot to their creds.


Peter, the Trolls have been saying they will be releasing a revamped LA for many years now. Any idea when we will see it?

 

[Valiant]

3rd Edition is video-gamey because the entire focus is on excessively increasing character abilities and absurdly large inventories of magical items.

No, 3E is video-gamey because it has the player role a known factor (that progresses) for every action they want to take (bluff, dodge, jump, tumble, climb etc.) a push button arcade feel. In AD&D it felt like you were actually doing it. You didn't know your chances (often the DM roled dice for you behind a screen...sometimes for real, sometimes to freak you out) and the DM didn't make it easy to predict (role a D20, role a d100 role 3 D6 etc.). In 3E its as if you hit a button for every conceivable move.

C&C just removed the titles, but the player still roles SIEGE to figure out each and every action based on what attribute its most associated with...logical and easy, but it accomplishes the opposite you'd want for an FRPG.

The "excessively increasing character abilities and absurdly large inventories of magical items" you mention is NOT what most people are talking about with the video game button feel comment (though thats annoying as well). I've played 1E campaigns with fast progression and huge magic inventories for all the PCs and it still feels totally early 80s late 70s AD&D (as long as its the exception and not the rule). Infact, a little variation in level progression and magic availability from time to time is very Gygaxian (ie. it emulates real life...every now and then some chump gets luckk, wins powerball super-lotto, etc). A predictable game is a bore.

 

[gideon_thorne]

Peter, the Trolls have been saying they will be releasing a revamped LA for many years now. Any idea when we will see it?

Some time next year.

As to the rest of the commentary, repeating the same old tired arguments doesn't make them any more true now, than they were 3 years ago. ^_~`

I said: -As for Gygax and his association with C&C, my understanding is that he is payed for his association, and in return the Troll Lords get the benefit of his name associated with their product.-

And it was pointed out that this was incorrect. Gary is paid for the work he produces. Having someone 'paid' for their association sounds like they are just paid to hang out. ^_~`

Its not known if Gygax would have gone whole hog into using C&C as his system of choice for publishing if he wasn't financially tied to TLG (personaly I doubt it, he'd likely stuck with LA).

This, despite the fact that Gary has said innumerable times that LA is unsuitable for level progression style dungeon crawls. And he made the decision to use C&C some time before it was published. So it clearly is known, and has been known for some time. ^_~`

 

[gideon_thorne]

C&C just removed the titles, but the player still roles SIEGE to figure out each and every action based on what attribute its most associated with...

No they don't. "Only those activities that have a significant chance of failure, as determined by the Castle Keeper, should be resolved by a dice roll."

Thats a direct quote. ^_^

 

[w_earle_wheeler]

As far as Elmore goes, I have never liked his paintings. I wouldn't classify him as a bad artist (quite the opposite) -- just the antithesis to my cup of tea.

 

[Prince of Happiness]

I like C&C. It suits me well.

 

[Dristram]

No, 3E is video-gamey because it has the player role a known factor (that progresses) for every action they want to take (bluff, dodge, jump, tumble, climb etc.). In AD&D it felt like you were actually doing it. You didn't know your chances (often the DM roled dice for you behind a screen...sometimes for real, sometimes to freak you out) and the DM didn't make it easy to predict (role a D20, role a d100 role 3 D6 etc.).

True, and not true. Non-weapon Proficiencies were invented in 1e and were the precursor to the 3e Skills system. NWPs and a Skills system or not, various DMs made rolls or made the players roll. What's the difference? The SIEGE is just a simple way to accomplish the rolls. The CK has full control when and how they are used. I find SIEGE useful as a standard way to determine a roll when I need it instead of winging it or making a houserule. And the players don't automatically know their chances of success because the Challenge Level (CL) is determined by the CK or other factors unknown to the players.

I'd like to add though, that many may feel that the mechanics behind the SIEGE is not the best for them. The SIEGE to me is the main thing for a person to like or not like C&C for. Besides that, the other stuff is very classic A/D&D.

 

[Uder]

I've switched over to C&C when I DM. As a player it's still 3.5, but for who knows how long!

 

[Melan]

Ah, it is always intriguing to watch a "discussion" between gideon_thorne and Axe Mental Valiant. Just plain argmentum ad nauseam, without a hint of reflection or concession, repeating the same tired points overandoverandoverandoverandoveraaagetitoffmehelphelpoverandoverandover. :\